Chabad - Atzmut in a body/R' Oliver & R' Berger I

Rabbi Oliver wrote to: "Chabad - Faith or Text Based Hashkofa?": [this is an excerpt from Rabbi Oliver's comment translating and explaining the Rebbe's statement regarding Atzmut in a body]

“Ve’al derech maamar haZohar, ‘man p’nei ho’adon do Rashbi, oder vi be’eIs ha’shlichus iZ afilu malach nikra b’shem Havayeh, oder vi Moshe Rabeinu hot gezogt venosati eisev.”

“This is similar to the statement of the Zohar,(1) ‘Whose is the face of the Master [G-d]? This is the Rashbi.’(2) Or [this can be explained along the lines of the idea that] at the time he performs his mission, an angel is called by the name of Havayeh [one of the Names of Hashem].(3) Or [this can be explained along the lines of the idea that] Moshe Rabeinu said, ‘I [Moshe] will give the grass.’” [Devarim 11:15] (4)

(1) Zohar 2:38a.

(2) I saw baalei nigleh [Talmudic experts] questioning this [statement from Zohar], and with a tremendous noise [claiming that it contradicts the doctrine that Hashem doesn’t have a form], how is it possible, etc., etc. [and thereby seeking to dismiss the words of the Zohar].” However [this is not only a matter of Kabbolo, for], we find [a statement] similar to this also in the revealed dimension of Torah [i.e., a Talmudic source], in Yerushalmi, Bikkurim, 3:3, “‘And G-d in His holy chamber’—this refers to Rebbi Yitzchok, the son of Rebbi Lezer in the house of study of Keisrin.”

(3) Tanya, Igeres HaKodesh end sec. 25. [One should not be surprised if a spark from a ray of the Shechinah is called [in the Baal Shem Tov’s Tzavaat HaRivash] by the name Shechinah, for we find that even an angel, which was created [and not a spark of the Shechinah], is called by Hashem’s Name in the parsha of Vayeira [“And he [Avraham] said [in reference to the angels who visited him], ‘L-rd, do not pass by your servant” Bereishis 18:3], according to the commentary of the Ramban [ibid.: “He [Avraham] called them by the Name of their Master [G-d], because he recognized that they are supernal angels, as they are called Elokim and Eilim [names of Hashem], and therefore he prostrated to the ground before them.] And as it is written [ibid. 16:13], ‘And she [Hogor] called the name of Hashem, Who spoke with her [where the verse says explicitly in ibid. 16:7 that it was an angel speaking to her],’ and there are many similar examples.]

(4) See Likkutei Torah, Vayikra 50a. [There the Alter Rebbe writes: With this we will understand that which appears surprising at first glance concerning the meaning of [the section] “And it will be if you will surely listen,” [Devarim 11:13] which Moshe said. How did he say, ‘I [Moshe] will give the grass’ [ibid. 11:15] as reward for observing the Mitzvos] as if he is the one giving, G-d forbid, as the commentators ask. For since in Mishneh Torah [Devarim] Moshe is like one speaking for himself [as opposed to repeating the words dictated to him by Hashem]—analyze the Ramban in his preface to his commentary on the Torah—if so it should have been written ‘And Hashem will give the grass.’ Rather, the explanation is that the Shechinah is speaking from the throat of Moshe, and the spirit of Hashem [within him] was what spoke [the words] ‘I [Moshe] will give the grass,’ not that he himself was the giver, G-d forbid. The reason for this is along the lines of what was explained earlier that through the Giving of the Torah the [Jewish people] attained the level of marriage [with Hashem], which is the inclusion and complete bittul [nullification] to Atzmus Ohr Ein Sof [the Essence of Hashem’s infinite light], until their souls literally flew out from them. In a similar manner, was the constant state of Moshe Rabeinu, as he said, ‘Go [Moshe] and tell them, return to your tents, and you stand here with Me.’ [Devarim 5:30] For he took up no space, and he was not an independent entity [from Hashem] at all. Therefore he was able to say ‘I will give,’ because the word of Hashem was speaking in him from within his throat.]

======================
Rabbi Micha Berger comment to "Chabad - Faith or Text Based Hashkofa?":

R' Oliver,

Thank you for going to substance.

You do not bring proof that RMMS was speaking of connectedness rather than identity. Rather, you cite his proofs that the chiddush is not as big of a chiddush as it seems; that it has priority. In none of the quote does your rebbe define Atzmus. Was he saying that the Zohar said that seeing Rashbi was a way of seeing godliness, or that the Zohar said that seeing him was actually seeing God?

I disagree that the Rebbe explicitly and clearly explains himself as meaning one and not the other. Frankly, I believe that given Lubavitch's form of tzimtzum shelo kepeshuto, the ideas are identical. Once there is chibur to the Borei, the illusion of yeish (yeish meiAyin as seen from "down here") is gone. I'll explain.

Where your quoted material does address explaining what those sources say is where the footnote points to your Alter Rebbe. Far from explicit, it's cited in a footnote without quotation. And in terms of clear -- it says both!

On the one hand, "the Shechinah is speaking from the throat of Moshe, and the spirit of Hashem [within him] was what spoke [the words] ‘I [Moshe] will give the grass,’ not that he himself was the giver, G-d forbid."

On the other hand, the text concludes "and he [ie Moshe -micha] was not an independent entity [from Hashem] at all."

It leaves us wanting. MRA"H is both not the Borei, and not a nivra distinct from the Borei. Moshe isn't the Giver of grass, however Moshe is so mevateil himself as to be a puppet that the Giver can speak through.

Now here's where things get messy, and I'll explain what I intimated above. "Ein od milvado". Or, "cheileq E-loak mima'al". Nu, so the rebbe IS G-d -- in the same way you, I, and perhaps even the keyboard I'm typing on are also G-d. And yet the rebbe is a puppet whose actions are G-d's, unlike you or I who have bechirah, or the keyboard which isn't a memutza mechabeir, hiding its godliness.

And thus, the Alter Rebbe isn't contradicting himself. By proving a rebbe is a memutza hamechabeir, one proves he is "cheileq E-loak mima'al' mammash" (as RMMS quotes the Tanya with emphasis) in a more immediate way than the rest of us.

This is my aforementioned "jump" in the argument. No one explicitly points out why by proving chibur, one proves true unity, identity, "Atzmus uMahus", not "merely" a vehicle for the Shechinah ("merely in quotes because being the merkavah is only a small thing by comparison).

What RMMS himself does write is

Last, Rabbi Oliver writes: "How amazing (to put it nicely) that you call a whole group of Jews by such a harsh, serious halachic name because you read a text, when at the same time you openly admit that you have no idea whether it's actually understood by members of the movement the way you as an outsider understand it!"

Check again what I wrote. I was careful to repeatedly say that I am trying to give a dispassionate assessment of a single idea, not of any people. (Never mind labeling them; even if I knew someone believed kefirah, that's insufficient to brand him a kofeir.)

PS: I have Al haTzaddikim and the sichah open in front of me when I write to this discussion.

Chabad - Respects non-Chabad gedolim?

Anonymous comment to "Chabad - Chasidim - not just Litvaks - are upset":

Rabbi Oliver wrote:

"The point of the story regarding learning Tanya was not to bash any true godol ch"v (note that the Rebbe didn't refer to him by name) but to bring out the greatness of learning Tanya, that someone who has learnt it, even a beginner, attains a certain level that even a great gaon who hasn't learnt Tanya doesn't attain. So what, what's the big scandal. What's the "sinister" "evil" "grave insult" over here. It's along the lines of a clear maamar Chazal: "Each tzaddik will be scorched by the 'canopy' of his fellow." (Bava Basra 75a) See Maharsha."

The Rebbe suggested that gemara in the very begining of his apologetic. The reason why its inappropriate is because it is, simply put, an ideological argument. The Rebbe could have easily said, "we in Chabad learn Tanya. That is our way. They have theirs." But he did not do that. He justified a comment made by a man in his drunken stupor about the jealousy a gadol b'yisroel in shomayim feels toward little children because they learn Tanya and he did not. The Chazon Ish was well versed in all of Torah, nistar included. The percieved benefits of learning Tanya would be akin to the benefits of the Rebbe learning, in addition to Rambam with its nosei kailim, all Brisker Torah. I could argue, based on his tortured logic, that since Brisker Torah is the amkus d'pashtus (according to THEM, not you--you have to appreciate how utterly wrong his comment actually is!), and since the Rebbe did not learn it, then, obviously, the Rebbe is jealous of any mesivta shnook learning a Brisker Rav! I would add that the Rebbe is profoundly jealous of me as I am certain he did not touch certain brisker seforim that I have learned cover to cover. I would add that he never learned anything from the Ahavas Yisroel. For this reason, he is PROFOUNDLY jealous of, you've got it, ME. After all, in my opinion, the torah of the Ahavas Yisroel is what Chazal mean by "talmudo."

The Rebbe's argument was unfounded, poorly thought out, led only to greater dissension between him and the rest of Charedi Jewry, and, in the final analysis, silly. He basically insulted a dead gadol in public because he is idealogically driven to one point of view.

>>Also, the Rebbe had great respect for the Chazon Ish, as recorded in the sefer Mishvochei Rebbi, Mordechai Menashe Laufer, p. 126, where the Rebbe says, "He appears to have been a yerei Shomayim". Someone commented "he was also a lamdan". To this the Rebbe responded, "this too was with yiras Shomayim."

A lamdan? A Yorah shomayim? Well, let me tell you, I think I have a GREAT shevach to say about the Rebbe: He had a beard. It was nice, white and robust. In fact, the beard was worn with yiras shomayim.

Why didn't the Rebbe just say that the CI did not pish in the mikva? That, too, is a "compliment."

Gedolei Yisroel like the Chazon Ish do not NEED such so-called respect. But the Rebbe NEEDED to be respectful of gedolei yisroel. If this is your best example of respect, the Rebbe has more to worry about than his canopy being scorched by another's.

>>Anon., why not investigate a bit better before jumping to conclusions about Tzadikim, do they not also have a chezkas kashrus?

I am not jumping to conclusions, I was aware of the great "shvachos" the Rebbe heaped on the Chazon Ish before I wrote this post. I still believe the Rebbe was a reverse misnagid, so to speak--not (like the original misnagdim) to protect the holy Torah from any breaches, c"v--but the misseh kind, the kind which hated because they believed their way was superior. And that notion of ethnocentrism and superiority is precisely what the Rebbe advocated in this apologetic.
======================
p.s. Yoni suggested viewing the video of the Rebbe discussing sleeping in a Sukkah. The transcript appears on the blog - Emet/Truth

Chabad - The one true form of Judaism?

LazerA comment to "Chabad - Why Chabad frightens me":

Rabbi Eidensohn,

My own experience with Chabad (I grew up in a home heavily associated with Chabad, in fact, I daven with the Nusach Ari of Chabad), made me uncomfortable with Chabad long ago, and has since turned me, not entirely willingly, into an opponent.

I think the issue that bothered me most, in the beginning, was Chabad's tendency to see themselves as the one, exclusive, legitimate form of Torah Judaism.

One of the defining characteristics of contemporary Orthodoxy is a high degree of pluralism. Despite some failures, the Torah world is extraordinarily open, esp. compared to previous generations, to various streams of Torah thought. Thus, for example, any major "litvish" yeshiva will have numerous talmidim who are chassidish, Sephardic, yekkish, and so on. The major Orthodox media regularly publish articles praising gedolim from every stream (with the exception of Religious Zionism).

This pluralism has its downside, of course. For example, the R' S. R. Hirsch that is so widely admired in the Torah world is not an fully accurate portrayal of the real R' Hirsch.

The dominant feature of the modern Torah world is be inclusive (even at the expense of accuracy) rather than exclusive.

(Modern Orthodoxy is an unfortunate exception. Why this is so is a major discussion which doesn't belong in this particular thread.)

My experience with Chabad as a child and an adult has been precisely the opposite. Gedolim from outside of Chabad are virually unknown. When they are mentioned, it is usually in a disparaging if not downright derogatory manner.

Similarly, other frum communities are seen as fundamentally flawed. All Jews need to join Chabad in order to achieve true ruchniyus. (My father got involved with Chabad through a secret "kiruv" group operating in Telz yeshiva.)

Thus, Litvaks are "snags", "Telz", "Lakewood" and "Satmar" are pejoratives, R' Aharon Kotler and R' Shach are reshaim, and virtually all contemporary gedolim are important only to the degree that they had a relationship with the Lubavticher rebbe.

This is accompanied by an Orwellian process of redefining Judaism as an invention of Chabad. Many of us have heard the radio advertisements before every Jewish holiday where we are told that the Lubavitcher rebbe says that all Jews should "light Chanukah candles", "hear the Megilah reading", etc. I once saw a small pamphlet sent out by Chabad which claimed, on the back cover, that Chabad created the minhag of reciting Tehillim.

In the contemporary Torah world, Torah thoughts from virtually all sources are seen as valuable. In the most Litvishe setting you can here divrei Torah from Chassidic sources (the Bnei Yissaschar, Sfas Emes, and Satmar Rav are particularly popular), Sephardic sources (esp. the Ben Ish Chai) and R' Hirsch. In Chabad you will never hear such sources. Moreover, Chabad chassidim are discouraged from studying non-Chabad hashkafa seforim, incl. other chassidishe seforim. (I don't know if this is an official position, but it is a widespread one.)

The ramifications of this self-isolation are immense. Almost any group with a strong sense of purpose has the potentiality for extremism. However, as long as a group views itself as part of a broader legitimate community, it will, to some degree, restrain itself from drifting to far afield.

When a particular Jewish community ceases to view the broader Torah world as significant, or even legitimate, it loses this grounding and will eventually drift away.

This is a tragedy of the greatest proportions. Unfortunately, because of the nature of the problem, there is little, if anything, the outside community can do.

Chabad - Why Chabad frightens me

The following reasonable and sensitive comment by Rabbi Oliver asks for my personal response. I will take a reluctant stab at answering because it is actually asking a very hard question - Who are you? - as if this were relevant to these issues.

I am first of all an observer and a participant. I have meaningful friends and interactions with a wide range of people with a wide range of beliefs. I have focused for many years on understanding the meta issues of the Jewish people and to be able to articulate the processes which lead to success and those which lead to disaster. If you peruse my seforim - Yad Moshe - the index to the Igros Moshe, Yad Yisroel - the index to the Mishna Berura and finally Daas Torah - the range of legitimate hashkofa views. You will notice that I am providing an interface - for others - to be able to quickly gain access to information of our gedolim regarding a wide range of issues. As I wrote in the introduction to Daas Torah - I was advised by the great talmid chachom and baal machshava - HaRav Moshe Shapiro, shlita - to let the texts speak for themselves without interjecting myself into the issues. Thus I try to stay in the background - but at the same time I try to make things happen as a catalyst for others.

The issue of Chabad is a very troubling one. The most frightening thing in the world is not a monster but something familiar - someone you love who might be corrupted and is out to destroy you. For example a husband or wife who becomes mentally ill and it is difficult to know whether their thoughts and actions are healthy or sick. A child who is a drug addict. Cancer is the most frightening disease because it turns your own healthy body into a destructive and deadly force. The communist scares of the McCarthy era was that maybe your best friends or your father was a communist. The horrors of the Inquisition were the result of the fear of the goyim that those who had converted were not sincere and so they did horrible tortures on people to try and clarify whether the converts were friend or foe. Fat people, mental ill people or the handicapped are discriminated against because they are distortions of what a person is supposed to be. The Fifth Column or traitor is the most frightening enemy.

I once talked to a chabadnik who lives in Crown Heights and asked him how he could live with the low life muggers and drug addicts that surrounded and permeated his neighborhood. He said ,"I can live with that because it is obvious that they are the enemy and they have no influence on me or may family. I could never live in Flatbush or some other nice quiet neighborhood because I would constantly be explaining to myself and my kids why that saintly apikorus or Christian is somehow inferior because they don't have Torah. I would be in constant fear that my children would fall in love with wonderful Reform or Conservative Jews. - who have more sensitivity than their chabad teachers. In Crown Heights I know who I am and I know who I am not."

Chabad elicits primal fears because they are in many ways the ideal of what a Jew is, at the same time they seem to do or think such grotesque absurd things or even heretical ideas that the cognitive dissonance drives me crazy. Therefore whenever Chabad says, "Look at all the mitzvos we do, look at our mesiras nefesh, look at all the people are frum because of us." It doesn't advance their cause it makes it worse because the dissonance becomes stronger. Whenever a chabadnik says, "Well on the surface what we say and do might seem problematic but if you learn to think like us by years of study you will agree that there is no problem" also increases the problem. If I, after years of Torah study or the talmidei chachomim I know and respect are upset about what they hear and read about Chabad - it doesn't help to say that my role models of Torah don't know what they are talking about. The "Just trust me" of the chabadnik is scary. After all isn't that what the Wolf said to Little Red Riding Hood?
============================================================

Rabbi Yehoishophot Oliver has left a new comment on your post "Chabad - Daas Torah Blog is "Pure unadulterated ha...":

I actually thought his mention of your sincerity was a backhanded compliment. Whatever.

Rabbi Eidensohn, just as you say that Chassidei Chabad should understand where you and your colleagues are coming from, so should you try to understand where Chassidei Chabad are coming from.

The relationship that a Chabad Chossid has with his Rebbe is a very deep relationship. It's not just about learning Torah. It's a deep personal feeling, and it's supposed to be (see, for example Kuntres Hishtatchus from the Mittele Rebbe). What if someone would start a blog badmouthing your father, would you respond dispassionately? I don't think anyone would. And if you didn't, would that reflect badly on your character? Nope.

So when you come on here, for all to see, and in essence attack Chassidim and even the Rebbe, albeit in a scholarly sounding way, it's very upsetting. We know that these claims come from misquotes, exaggerations, third-hand reports, etc. Take your post right here. Is it really fair to jump to a conclusion that one hostile post tarnishes the entire movement? I think not. We also know that some claims have some truth to them, albeit exaggerated as if these are faults of everyone or most, when in fact it's only a small minority or even a handful. You see, we know that these are exaggerations.

For example, we know that the vast majority of Lubavitchers are very nice people, and the earlier post where you quoted something impolite that a Lubavitcher said to you really comes off as a totally unfair misrepresentation, when we know that it's not so. Also, we know that there exist some regrettable faults in certain individuals over which we don't have much control, and quite frankly, that also causes us pain.

This upset feeling is all the more intense when we as Lubavitchers know that a claim, certainly the one concerning revelation of Elokus in Tzadikim, is simply not factual.

I personally have been so upset that I've had to make a tremendous effort not to go there, and stick to the issues in a more understated way, because that's the way I'm going to have some constructive impact. I think that Hirschel's post wasn't constructive, but personally, I can relate to Hirschel's sentiments. And I know other Chassidim who are so upset when they see the distortions and exaggerations, etc., that they just can't handle it, so they avoid such sites and interactions altogether.

I don't know you personally; I'm still trying to figure you out from your blog, but there definitely exist people who have a sick, malicious agenda to attack everything about Chabad, one driven by far less than pure motives, even if only subconsciously. Everything they can get their hands on that sounds disparaging, they post, and all in the name of "exposing the truth." That's sinas chinam because although there are pretexts for the hatred, at the core those are not the reasons, and this is just evident in the way they talk. They are out there, and everyone knows the names of their blogs. Is it so far-fetched for someone to confuse you with them, that you should be surprised at a hostile response? (By the way, I'd appreciate a response, instead of just reposting my post for others to respond.)

Chabad - An angry screed with some good points

The following angry screed is being posted simply because R' Bergstein does make some valuable points which have been ignored up till now. However, his knee jerk fury is apparent from the fact that he is responding as if Prof. David Berger has been participating in the discussion when in fact it is Rabbi Micha Berger - founder of AishDas Society - who has devoted his life to Ahavas Yisroel and is a mumche in Machshava.

I have attempted to be even handed in the presentation - and most of the feedback I have seen indicates that I have succeeded in keeping things well within acceptable bounds. This is not a debating society to score points but simply a forum to have an intelligent discussion with people you would not be able to interact with otherwise. These issues are not ivory tower academics or theological hairsplitting. These are real concerns for frum yidden and the future of our people.

R' Chaim Moshe Bergstein (Farmington Hills Michigan) comments to "Chabad - Faith or Text Based Hashkofa?":

again david berger [sic] you spout your nonsense as if you really care.how many people have you gone out of your way to bring into Yiddishkeit? and if you do care why don't you concentrate on the Jews who don't keep Shabbos and get them to keep Shabbos?

you are now a big-shot in YU. The Rav was a personal friend of the Rebbe and came to his 80th birthday. the sicho that is in your craw was said in 1950 and was widespread. 32 years later the Rav comes to greet your apikores in his building?! so what can the casual observer say ?? that the Rav found a way to interpret that Sicha in a kosher way.

The same for Reb Moshe who was a personal friend of the Rebbe even while he disagreed with some of the Rebbe's ideas. If this is so blatant then how would Reba Moshe have the audacity to address the Rebbe as Hagaon HaKodosh in the Igros Moshe?-well after 1950!

your interpretation is consistently weighted to the bad side when it can be equally translated differently from your silly conclusion even in this tzitut that you quote.There are many dargos of what is called Atzmus Umehus including the esser Sefiros and many dargos in OHr ayn sof. furthermore the concept is based upon memutza hamechaber-not a new idea but the biur of Shchina Medaberes Bigrono Shel Moshe by the Rebbe Rashab in resh nun tes.(1899) if this was so awful how was Reb Chaim so close to such an Apikores????chas vesholom! the Rebbe Rashab was a gaon and a Kodosh as was our late Rebbe ZTL and you are the opposite.

use the word memutza hamechaber as a wire for electricity and there are no shaalos except what you would like to place because of your sick need to kick someone around.

you will say no-you want to save the generation-save the jews in YU that they shouldn't do non-tznius things , that they should never become Rabbis in conservative shuls,that they should not endorse the zoologist Slifkin, that the girls in Stern's college should have a dress code according to the Shulchan Aruch, that the thousands who are frieing out in front of you should pause and reconsider.

instead all of your energies are focused upon blackballing Jews who are more religious than you and for a great part more knowledgeable than you and enjoy their religion more than you. this is really a great thing you are doing-for the Satan!

Big Brother in Beitar III - Undesirables in Beitar are frum yidden

Anonymous comment to "Big Brother in Beitar":

There is a clear distinction between Lakewood and Beitar in that the "undesirables" in Beitar are sincere frum people who have issues such as being baalei teshuva, kids off the derech, not dressing according to the charedi mold, etc. If they can't live in a frum neighborhood then they have no other choice. Plus, it could happen to anyone with teenagers, no matter how frum the rest of the family is. Though the people who are bullied and intimidated and discriminated against are usually davke the loners and weak people who can't take it and either suffer or just leave the community - these people are not illegal aliens and drug dealers. If anything it's the establishment here that acts like thugs. Everyone here accepts in theory the concept of controlled demographics, but the problem is the discriminatory, corrupt, mafia, big brother, etc methods. and that there is a built in system for neighbors to use loshon hara and even motzei sheim ra to label someone as a pariah, without clear guidelines and due process to determine the truth and the proper way to resolve the issues. This system is the background to the ultimate result of a 14 year old girl being reported on, tracked, and attacked with acid in her face, though they had harassed and threatened her older sister. This is clearly antithetical to the beginning of the Tur's choshen mishpat. [quote] not to mention all of the mussar values of the Torah way of life. I am sure the Chofetz Chaim is rolling over in his grave that this is what passes for "chassidus" and "kedusha" nowadays.

Chabad - Daas Torah Blog is "Pure unadulterated hatred" (Hirschel Tzig)

Hirschel Tzig has strongly criticized my integrity on his blog. He "proves" my lack of sincerity by the obvious fact that I do not publish anonymously. Only anonymous bloggers are sincere since their sincerity endangers them. Since I am apparently not concerned with being personally attacked that "proves" that I am not genuine and am merely a purveyor of hatred against Chabad. I would not be making this a post except that he is an influential blogger and a self proclaimed defender of Chabad. His style of defense is perhaps stronger proof than all the erudite and sensitive comments of Rabbi Oliver that there is something seriously wrong with Chabad today. He wrote the following on his blog - Circus Tent in a post title "Not-so-brave man"

I was recently made aware of the DaatTorah Blog. In a nutshell; the blog can be defined in one word: Hateful. In a scholarly, "We're concerned about the problematic teachings and sichos" kind of way. Which is kind of like the white supremacists pointing out the "problematic passages in the Talmud." If you have a problem with Jews then you'll believe anything. The same goes for Lubavitch, a microcosm of the entire Klal Yisroel. What DaatTorah is, is basically rehashed Areivim posts and thoughts by some of the shining stars who post there, Mr. Eidensohn included. One thing did surprise me, the fact that he put his name and picture up for all to see. His name is on all his comments on Areivim, but the picture adds a nice touch to it. Makes it a very open exchange of ideas and of opinions, and shows that he truly believes in what he opines, and is willing to put his face behind every comment.

Why does that surprise me? After all, it's only the ones who show the hypocrisies of the mainstream that need to worry about their safety and the education and marriage prospects of their children. They're the ones who are terrified of people finding out who they are and phone calls made to their childrens' chadorim and schools that the ____________ kids are not be allowed there anymore. Not that I think I need to worry about THAT aspect of it, or at least that's I'm told, but I do need to worry in general, you never do know which zealot can decide that I offended his something or other and deserve to be hurt or my property damaged. So we live in anonymity, and the Eidensohns of the world are out there for all to know, maybe even thinking of themselves as respectable gentlemen doing what's right ------ fighting the evil empire, Chabad.

C'est La Vie.

=======================================

Hirshel Tzig comment to "Chabad - Chasidim - not just Litvaks - are upset":

The Rebbe was referring not to "a drunk shliach" but to a Yid, a Baal Mesiras Nefesh in Russia, who made a statement, not disrespectfully I might add, about the Chazon Ish. The Chazon ish of 1954, not the Chazon Ish of 2008. By that I mean that his reputation was not what it is today.

I have issues with people who like the anonymous commenter you quote who make statements about groups they know VERY little about, and do not have the intellectual capacity to understand what they mean.

I'll reiterate the statement I made on my blog: This is nothing but pure unadulterated hate towards Chabad, albeit in a suit and tie. Sorta like Joe Kennedy's anti-Semitism, very refined, but still the same thing, if not worse.

Chabad - Chasidim - not just Litvaks - are upset

Anonymous comment to "Chabad - Faith or Text Based Hashkofa?":

I have long been very open minded and accepting toward Chabad. As a chussid, I have been raised to love every yid, no matter what.

I learned about Chabad in a kind of backwards fashion. I asked Chabadniks both in person and on the net for explanations. And I started to become increasingly alarmed not merely about the irrationality of some of their beliefs, but also of the utter hatred they have toward others. A Jew who did not learn Tanya is not learning an integral component of the Torah!!! The Rebbe actually stated this to justify the remarks of a certain drunk shliach which amounted to, "The Chazon Ish is jealous of any young boy learning Tanya in Tomchei Temimim." Once I saw this for myself, I started really questioning the Rebbe. The Chazon Ish was quite close to the Vizhnitzer Rebbe, and I, as a Vizhnitzer Chussid, always had appreciation for the way the Chazon Ish talked about the Ahavas Yisroel, zy"a. My Rosh Yeshiva, the great gaon, Rav Rafoel Schorr, shlit"a, introduces us to the method of the Chazon Ish. As you can imagine, I love his seforim. To read this comment and the tortured logic used in his justification shook me up considerably. I later found several blogs on the net which is seething with hatred toward litvishe gedolei yisroel, replete with lies. The vehemence of their rancor toward Rav Shach knows no bounds--and facts and honesty don't get in the way, either. Reading the well known comments you are grappling with leads me to conclude, like my father always said, that the Rebbe was an incredibly great man who simply said things which were, at times, off. Much worse, I think, are those who call themselves Chabad chassidism who have brought so much hatred for anyone who is not like them in this world. I am not saying everyone is like this, c"v. On the contrary, I have met some genuinely lovely people from Chabad. But others like Ariel Sokolovsky and those who post on theantitzemach.blogspot.com have genuine issues with halacha, hashkafa, and other yidden. And that, I think, is something which would cause their Rebbe pain.

Its a real shame things ended up like this.

Chabad - Current generation misunderstands Kabbala?

LazerA comment to "Chabad - Tzimtzum - literal or figurative?":

Rabbi Yehoishophot Oliver said...
"Excuse me, LazerA, who won't answer the question about his or her kabbalistic knowledge, exactly which kabbalistic concepts do you claim "Chabad" has "misunderstood"?"

At no point was I ever asked about my kabalistic knowledge, nor would I have bothered answering such questions. This discussion is not about me, nor, quite frankly is it relevant what my personal knowledge level might be. None of my statements have depended on substantive kabalistic knowledge.

In this entire discussion, I have focused on two points:
A) That the concept of figurative tzimtzum that is well-established in Chasidic thought (incl. Chabad) is also accepted by non-Chasidid sources, such as the Nefesh Hachaim, and, in fact, may be the opinion of the Vilna Gaon as well, as per R' Dessler. (R' Dessler was a brilliant talmid chacham with VERY substantive knowledge of kabalalistic sources. His opinion cannot be simply shrugged off as ignorant.)

B) That the dangers associated with kabalistic knowledge are real and have not disappeared simply because the gedolim have determined that that knowledge should be revealed.

Neither point is one requiring great kabalistic knowledge on my part.

As for Chabad, my criticism is restricted to "current Chabad". Clearly, the Baal HaTanya, the Tzemach Tzedek, and other Chabad rebbes were Torah giants and masters of kabalistic knowledge of the highest caliber.

Current Chabad, however, is rife with amateur "mekubalim", many with minimal Torah knowledge. I am personally aware of a number of ridiculous teachings emanating from classes taught by Chabad teachers based upon superficial readings and understandings of kabalistic ideas presented in the Tanya. There is no benefit in detailing these, as the specific errors are not representative of the movement. They do, however, indicate an openness within Chabad to kabalistic study and teaching by individuals that are clearly not qualified.

As for the movement as a whole, the biggest single issue is that many Lubavitchers have become very confused by kabalisitic concepts that identify a tzadik with Hashem. (Such ideas are also found in non-kabalistic sources.) This has led many Lubavitchers to identify their late rebbe with Hashem Himself, in varying degrees of literalness. This problem is widely recognized throughout the Torah world, but Lubavitchers continue to deny that the problem even exists.

Chabad - Faith or Text Based Hashkofa?

Rabbi Micha Berger comment to "Chabad - can only be understood from inside by tho...":

This marks the end of my 5th attempt to get you to explain how the rebbe's words say what you claim they do that just caused Rabbi Oliver to criticize my ability to read the words myself. My citing phrases from your source text didn't help elevate the plane of conversation. I am forced to conclude that he does not in fact have an actual explanation, that it's simply a faith decision that the rebbe couldn't have possibly meant what he clearly wrote.

To leave on a more positive note, I'm glad to hear that in your neck of the Lubavitch community most people "spin" those words so as to avoid their saying something my rav would consider apiqursus.

As for my knowledge of machashavah, I suggest you read my work and decide for yourself. I'm not going to sit here and play up my credentials. My ego doesn't need massaging that badly.

Big Brother in Beitar II - legitimate fear of minorities

Anonymous commented on your post "Big Brother in Beitar":

In the US, the issues are a bit different than in Israel.

Observant Jews as a community spend millions of charitable dollars building shuls, schools, mikvoth and community centers. Because we must live walking distance to shul, there are not many neighborhoods in the US where an observant Jew can live and it is not generally easy or even possible to move.

Because Orthodox Jews do not put their children in public schools, in frum areas, children from underprivileged districts will often be bused in to fill the empty public school seats.

Orthodox Jews hire service workers in homes, schools, caterers, grocers etc. Discrimination is very real in the US and Jews are among the few who hire minorities who naturally like to live near work.

Jews also tend invest in rental properties in frum neighborhoods. The only tenants for rundown rentals are minority workers and their families who otherwise cannot afford Jewish neighborhoods, so several wage earners will share a single family home.

In many frum neighborhoods in the US, there are those who did not grow up in Boro Park or Flatbush under the siege of racial tensions from the surrounding neighborhoods.
These Jewish investors do not understand the implications of living among ethnic groups who have a history of violence against Jews.

http://www.vosizneias.com/18644/2008/07/29/north-miami-beach-fl-police-chief-meets-community-to-assure-safety/

So you frum communities of a few thousand Jews living under siege. In NMB, for example, children can not even play in the front yard, there are nightly break in attempts on homes, it is terrifying to come home after dark, and women and children are afraid to walk to shul on Shabbos in broad daylight.

Once dozens of homes in frum neighborhoods have already been rented out like this, what is there to do? (The asking price of houses in NMB has dropped about 40% in wake of the recent crime. This makes it even more impossible for families to move).

The local police cannot win the battle against crime in minority neighborhoods which they consider too dangerous to even patrol. In Miami, the City has contracted with a private security agency to patrol crime ridden areas.

The yeshivas, shuls, mikvoth and kosher services in North Miami Beach were built with 50 years of community tzedakah and the frum residents have no where else to go.. These services cannot be duplicated in another less crime ridden area. Especially not when homes are worth less than their mortgages.

This is an issue now in frum communities all over the US. It might seem harsh and bigoted to Israelis try to prevent Jewish landlords from renting to whomever they wish (ie in Lakewood). But consider that in recent months, it has become statistically safer to live in Sderot than in many frum US neighborhoods.

If you were locked in your house behind iron window bars, afraid to go to a Shalom Zachor, evening shiur or even to shul on Shabbos morning; if you were afraid to even let your children play in front of your home, how would you feel?

Perhaps, like the Rabbis in Lakewood you might also support a ban on landlords renting their properties in Jewish neighborhoods to whomever they wish.

Big Brother in Beitar

Important Announcement to Landlords and Sellers

As everyone knows a committee has been established in Beitar under the auspices of the rabbinical authorities to supervise the quality of life in our community and to monitor all events in the city in order to maintain its holiness.

We know that there are families who rent out their apartments without our approval and as a result undesirable families move into our community. We are putting everyone on notice that these landlords and sellers must be revealed and publicized as disobeying the rabbis of the city. Furthermore all the expenses for canceling the contract or lease is their sole responsibility..

Do you know about a spiritual hazard?. Please put our special number 580-0777 in your cell phone and any problematic occurrences that you are aware of should be reported immediately to us - 24 hours a day.

See also the following link