Letter and Spirit: In Defense of the Rebbe and Chabad
In this week’s edition of Letter and Spirit, we present a letter sent – not from the Rebbe, but – from Rabbi Nissan Mindel on his own accord, in which he responds to close relative regarding certain criticisms aimed at the Rebbe and Chabad. The letter was made available by his son-in-law Rabbi Sholom Ber Shapiro.
It is believed that the letter was reviewed and edited by the Rebbe, as this was commonly the case when Reb Nissan sent letters in his own name.
This new weekly feature is made possible by a collaboration between CrownHeights.info and Nissan Mindel Publications. Once a week we will be publishing unique letters of the Rebbe that were written originally in the English language, as dictated by the Rebbe to Rabbi Mindel.
***********
B’H
Pesach Sheini, 5730
Thank you for your letter… I was puzzled by your question about the Cadillac – as you correctly surmised. But frankly, I could find more profitable use for my time than answering criticism of Lubavitch. If everything said and rumored were taken seriously & refuted – a full time secretary would be required (& nothing would be gained). For usually these critics are not interested in the truth but only wish to criticize and find fault. However, I cannot refuse you an answer since you seem genuinely concerned…
To begin with, you have conveyed to me something which you heard from someone, who has heard it from someone else… Although I usually refuse to discuss hearsay, I will give my reply in the order of your letter:
1) I am not aware of anyone being warned, before going into the Rebbe’s, shlita room for a private audience, to address him as “Your Eminence.” This is absurd. (I know of one writer who insists on using this expression when referring to the Rebbe, but that is the said writer’s prerogative). The usual custom is to address the Rebbe, when speaking to him, in the third person (“The Rebbe said…), but this respectful manner is due to any older Rov… it has always been the custom to use the third person when writing to anyone in Hebrew and the Rebbe also uses this form exclusively, except when writing to children. This is also my practice.
2) Not to speak before spoken to, to stand in the Rebbe’s presence and to walk backwards when leaving – this is the customary way Chasidim act in the Rebbe’s presence… this is in the best tradition of Jewish etiquette. (I presume this would be the routine when being received in audience by the Queen?). The Rebbe asks non-Chasidim to sit down, and some do. I sit in the Rebbe’s presence only when taking dictation. That fellow is barking up the wrong tree if he criticizes this procedure.
3) I know that the Rebbe does not accept personal gifts for himself or his wife from anyone. The only exception is books – and that for his library, since it is of public service. Checks made payable to the Rebbe go to ”Special Discretionary Fund” – for special cases or directed to one of the institutions.
4) On the question of “miracles” – here too, the well-known adage can be applied: “For him who believes, no proof is necessary, for him who does not believe, no proof will suffice.” However I will present here some basic observations in regard to miracles: Jews who believe in the Torah believe in miracles; Jews who believe in the Talmud, believe in the ability of certain men (Tannaim etc.) to perform miracles; many men are mentioned in the Talmud who perform miracles, and none was “deified”; the efficacy of blessings and prayers has often been stressed in the Talmud, even of an ordinary Jew; there are “miracles” & there are “miracles”… of turning blood into water etc. and of a blessing come true – such as a refu’a, children, affluence. As for the first kind – I have not heard of any Chosid claim the Rebbe has performed this. It is usually a case of his blessing or prayer having materialized. Those who have experienced such “miracles”- do not have to see a “rational” explanation for, as mentioned above, it is well within the realm of men, especially saintly men. Skeptics may want to “rationalize” such miracles – it is their prerogative.
5) There is no way of preventing anyone who has been helped “miraculously” by the Rebbe from shouting it from the rooftops… I do not know of a single instance where the Rebbe took credit for any “miracle” or even alluded to it, though he receives many letters from people who inform the Rebbe that his prayer had helped them “miraculously.”
6) On one occasion, when asked by a student about his helping people in a “miraculous” way, the Rebbe replied that any Jew who is a shomer Torah & mitzvos is capable of performing such miracles by virtue of his attachment to the Giver of the Torah & mitzvos. (as a light can be switched on because of its connection to the source, the power station).
7) The kind of miracles attributed to the Rebbe have been similarly attributed to other saintly men (Vilna Gaon, Reb Itzele of Rezhitze… about whom I was told by my family members).
8) As for attaching a “G-d- like” image to the Rebbe, oft repeated criticism, it is a matter of semantics. We have all been created in the “image of G-d” and therefore have “G-d-like images.” Certainly a Jew who is more closely attached to G-d, & consistently so, has more of a (revealed) G-dly image than a Jew who is not so close. I cannot imagine a greater stupidity than the charge of the Rebbe being “deified.” Even Moshe Rabbeinu was never deified. (this has a place in Xstian dogma, not in Judaism).
9) I need hardly point out that neither the Rebbe nor his wife is ostentatious in any way. Not only do they not travel “first class” (it would be no crime if they did), but they do not travel, period. In my association with the present Rebbe for nearly 30 years, he has not taken a vacation for a single day… I believe his wife made one trip abroad, but I do not know if she traveled first class.
10) Now for the “celebrated Cadillac. This car is by far not the most expensive car in the U.S.A…. it is most often bought here for its performance rather than prestige. If it is a luxury, it is probably the only one the Rebbetzen can be “accused” of. It so happens that she is rather petite & it is the most comfortable for her to drive. I should know, because I went with her to buy her first Cadillac (she insisted on subdued colors). You see, she has no private chauffeur to drive her around…
I am sorry that you were so distressed about these criticisms and having to “defend” the Rebbe. Spare yourself the aggravation. Nothing you will say will convince those who delight in criticism of this kind. As for the innocent bystander, you can only tell him: Don’t believe everything you see and believe nothing you hear.
Affectionately,
Nissan
************
The above letter is from the archives of Rabbi Dr. Nissan Mindel, a personal secretary to the Previous Rebbe and The Rebbe, whose responsibilities included the Rebbe’s correspondence in English.
Many of the letters are now being published in The Letter and the Sprit, a series of volumes by Nissan Mindel Publications.
We thank Rabbi Sholom Ber Shapiro, director of Nissan Mindel Publications and the one entrusted by Rabbi Mindel, his father-in-law, with his archives, for making these letters available to the wider public. May the merit of the many stand him in good stead.
no 7
Vilna Gaon should not be mentioned in same category as others…not close
Shlomo Seldowitz
The name of the Vilna Gaon is widely recognized in both the frum and not yet frum worlds. Hence, for the sake of driving home a pint why should that name or any other be used to drive home the point. Certainly, this was Rabbi Mindel’s reasoning, that that of the Rebbe, if he in deed dictated the letter to Rabbi Mindel.
The commentator apparently refers to the Tzemach Tzedek’s decision not to read the Gra’s commentary on Shulchan Orech, but rather have it read to him, as he choose not to look at the osayos.
I also heard from my teacher and mashpiya Rabbi Shneur Zalman Gafni that in the kuntres Bikur Chicago the Rayatz point out from where the Gra took his inspiration, v’dai l’mayveen.
duh
did you bother to read the second paragraph of this article, where it says that the rebbe himself reviewed and edited this? so who exactly are you telling not to mention one person with others?
Milhouse
To “duh”, it seems that you are the one who did not bother to read the second paragraph instead of skimming it. If you had read it you would know that it does not say what you claim.
to # 1
The Vilna Gaon is not mentioned in the same category as “others” – plural, only in the one category of the other one mentioned.
From your strongly worded comment it seems you aren’t aware of who Rav Nissen Mindel z”l is and of what he knows. It’s adviseable you do your homework.
To #2
I thought the same thing! I would of agreed also.
BUT! If the Rebbe ‘proof read’ the letter, If the Rebbe even just read it, and the Rebbe DIDN’T make a comment, or asked that it be changed…Than we have to ask ourselves,, “Who are WE, Who am I to say or think different than the REBBE!!!”?
Milhouse
Why are you so sure the Rebbe read it? Going by the article itself that is just the writer’s speculation.
K
Do you think in a million years the Rebbe would approve of the expression “barking up the wrong tree”? To say that to another Yid implies that he “barks” – acts like a dog!
Milhouse
Come off it, K, it’s a perfectly normal English idiom.
K
No true Godol would allow the use of this “perfectly normal English idiom” – I respect the Lubavitcher Rebbe more than you do and am certain he would have been mocheh.
K
Would any ben torah with refined midos say about another yid, “his bark is worse than his bite”?
It is “a perfectly normal English idiom”, but it is simply not appropriate to talk about any human being as if he is a dog, much less, about a yid!
“Barking up the wrong tree” and “his bark is worse than his bite” are equally inappropriate.
What ever happened to possessing good and refined midos??!!
Ch. S.
For the sake of clarity and to keep the matter simple:
– the Vilna Gaon is mentioned to make the point that any Jew, as long as he is shomer Torah u’mitzvos, has the capacity for miracles (that his bracha be fulfilled). Yes, his name is mentioned only in this category of Jews and not among the first, which refers to Tana’im etc.
– as to the objection of referring to the Vilna Gaon at all (which is clearly a side issue of the letter and by no means a central point) – it would be good to remember that the Rebbe brings down the G’ra in his commentary of the Haggada shel Pesach (as we just learned a few days ago) in addition to other places.
AYL
where did the rebitzen go? and why?
Milhouse
In 1953 the Rebbetzin went to Paris to visit the chassidim who were still living as displaced persons
no 7
vdai mayveen? who are you kidding? go be proud of the hackneyed maiselach…true gadlus ba Torah is for those with true ameilus ,hasmodah and havonah,,but take the easy way out is good for beinonim and third tier members
Milhouse
Yes, vedai lameivin. Go learn the kuntres and see whether you are a meivin for whom it is dai, or not.
no 7
thankfully the cheirem was never lifted
Ezra
So, then, you are accusing R. Chaim Volozhiner and his son R. Itzele, R. Akiva Eiger, R. Chaim Brisker, the Chofetz Chaim, etc., of violating a cherem? Do you think that, perhaps, they (R. Chaim Volozhiner especially, as one of the leading disciples of the Vilna Gaon) knew better than you?
Milhouse
The cherem was never valid in the first place. It was a gross violation of halacha. When the holy talmidim of the Magid wanted to put the GRO in a real cherem, which would cut his neshomo off from its source, the Alter Rebbe didn’t say they were wrong; his objection was only that the result would be a chilul haShem.
We accept that the GRO meant it lesheim shomayim, and therefore we overlook his wrongdoing, but let’s not pretend that he was right, r”l!
K
The GRA was called the Gaon (even by the Baal Hatanya). He was on the level of a Rishon. He made no mistakes!
Ezra
And yet, K, the same Baal Hatanya who called him a gaon also characterized the cherem as שגגה שיצאה מלפני השליט, an error that came forth from before the ruler.
So don’t give us your “he made no mistakes” nonsense; if even Moshe Rabbeinu בא לכלל כעס בא לכלל טעות, how much more so others.
Milhouse
Don’t be silly. The GRO was certainly not a rishon. The Alter Rebbe was on that level – רב תנא הוא ופליג. The GRO was not.
The Alter Rebbe had great respect for him and called him הגאון החסיד, but that did not prevent him from pointing out his terrible mistakes. Look what the Alter Rebbe wrote in Shaar Hayichud Veho’emuno ch 7, at the beginning of the second section (page 83a):
והנה מכאן יש להבין שגגת מקצת חכמים בעיניהם ה׳ יכפר בעדם ששגו וטעו בעיונם בכתבי האריז״ל והבינו ענין הצמצום המוזכר שם כפשוטו שהקב״ה סילק עצמו ומהותו ח״ו מעוה״ז … לא בדעת ידברו …
As every mashpia and older chossid will tell you, this refers to the GRO.
The GRO’s cherem was a terrible mistake, a blatant violation of halacha that would have fully justified the cherem that the chevraya kadisha wanted to make against him. The Alter Rebbe did not dispute that it was justified. His only objection was the terrible chilul haShem that would result if such a great gaon were ch”v to shmad himself.
K
Name even one Godol after the times of the Geonim who was called a “Goan”? There was only one – the GRA!!!
Would you believe for a second that the BESHT, Magid or any of the Chabadsker Rebbes EVER did a שגגה שיצאה מלפני השליט. If someone told you that – you would laugh in their face!
Do you not know that ALL the major Gedolim of that time (I am talking about Gedolei Haposkim who guide us to this day in Halacha) – they all joined the cherem!!
The ONLY rational explanation is “elu velu divrei elokim chayim” – and each was right in his own derech of avodas Hashem (just as Bais Shamai and Bais Hillel who totally opposed each other in halacha l’ma’aseh).
So let’s not be silly by denigrating the GRA c”v in ANY way!!
K
Milhouse’s allegation that the Baal Hatanya was referring to the GRA, “as every mashpia and older chossid will tell you” – is wrong!
Anyone who studied the topic properly (without the myopic lens of Chabad chassidus) knows that the statement applies to many opinions of great gedolei yisroel as discussed in the Shomrei Emunim when listing the various shitos on hashgacha elyona and hashgacha protis, “as every ben Torah and yodeya sefer will tell you”.
Ezra
So in K’s world, issuing a cherem against chassidim equals respecting their path as “divrei elokim chayim.” Poor Orwell must be spinning in his grave.
And I think there _might_ be a slight difference between you or I saying about the Gra that a statement of his was a שגגה, vs. a contemporary – the Alter Rebbe – who was at least on the same level. But never mind; carry on with your gadolatry, while all the while claiming that only chassidim would stoop to that.
K
The Baal Hatanya called the GRA a “gaon”, but the GRA (or anyone else) never called the Baal Hatanya by the name of “gaon”.
This isn’t a game of “my gadol is bigger than your gadol”. It is a fact!
Ezra
Really? What do you think the acronym גר”ז (used by the Mishnah Berurah) stands for?
And by the way, your assertion that “ALL the major Gedolim of that time” joined in the cherem is a flat-out lie. (I thought that מילתא דעבידא לאיגלויי לא משקרי אינשי, but apparently some people are not אינשי.) The Pri Megadim didn’t join in – is he not “Gedolei Haposkim who guide us to this day in Halacha”? Neither did R. Refael of Hamburg (the story about this is well known), R. Yaakov Emden, the Noda Biyehudah (despite his opposition to the chassidic movement), etc.
K
“ALL the major Gedolim of that time”: כולם = רובם ככולם
Yes, there were some VERY few who did not join the cherem for various reasons. They were the EXCEPTIONS from the vast majority of the greatest poskim by whose words we live today!
K
Many gedolim have the title “gaon” before their name, but there was only one who was called “THE Gaon” (l’mashal: in our days, there are many Rosh Yeshivas, but only one called “The Rosh” – it is not the same, but hopefully you get the point).
Ezra
Uh-huh. We’re already familiar with how you try to twist words; now you make the risible claim that “ALL” – in all caps, yet – somehow doesn’t mean what it says.
I named four contemporary gedolei Yisrael who did not join in signing the cherem. You’re claiming that the overwhelming majority did. So, where’s your list? Can you name anyone besides the Vilna Gaon and the members of the batei din of Vilna and Brody who did sign the cherem?
Milhouse
Name even one Godol after the times of the Geonim who was called a “Goan”? There was only one – the GRA!!!
What a blatant liar you are. What about the Rogachover Gaon? The Vilner Gaon was not special. He was not “the Gaon”, just the Vilner Gaon. He was the GRE, just as the Alter Rebbe was the GRZ. No different.
Also, Rashi was called Gaon, but that was in the Bavli sense, meaning a full-time rosh yeshivah who made his living from the yeshivah. (No, Rashi was not a vintner. And his daughters did not lay tefilin.)
The Baal Hatanya called the GRA a “gaon”, but the GRA (or anyone else) never called the Baal Hatanya by the name of “gaon”.
Ezra already pointed out that your “or anyone else” is a lie. But the fact that the Alter Rebbe had the honesty and humility to acknowledge the Vilner Gaon’s gadlus, while the Vilner Gaon did not have the perception to see the Alter Rebbe’s gadlus just shows how blinded he was by hatred. It’s a point against him. Think of how the gemoro makes a point of the fact that Beis Hillel put Beis Shamai’s words before their own.
Would you believe for a second that the BESHT, Magid or any of the Chabadsker Rebbes EVER did a שגגה שיצאה מלפני השליט. If someone told you that – you would laugh in their face!
Indeed, they had סיעתא דשמיא and never did anything wrong. The Vilner Gaon clearly did not have סיעתא דשמיא, because the evidence of his mistake is right before us, the topic of this discussion. You just insist that it wasn’t an mistake, because you are a rasha who calls evil good.
Milhouse’s allegation that the Baal Hatanya was referring to the GRA, “as every mashpia and older chossid will tell you” – is wrong!
Oh, really. Go ask every mashpia or older chossid, whom the Alter Rebbe was referring to with those words, and they will all tell you the same thing. It was the Vilner Gaon.
Anyone who studied the topic properly (without the myopic lens of Chabad chassidus) knows
Excuse me? Are you trying for a comedy award? Are you seriously claiming that those who are ignorant of Chabad chassidus understand the Tanya better than those who have been steeped in chassidus, and have received the interpretation ish mipi ish from the author himself?! Are you really that deluded?
that the statement applies to many opinions of great gedolei yisroel as discussed in the Shomrei Emunim when listing the various shitos on hashgacha elyona and hashgacha protis,
Excuse me again? What have the shitos on hashgocho protis got to do with this? Everyone knows that there were various views among the rishonim about hashgocho, and that the Baal Shem Tov’s shita eventually won out, and is now universally accepted. (Dayan Abramsky said that anyone today who doesn’t believe in hashgocho protis according to the Baal Shem Tov is an apikores.) But what has that got to do with this quote from the Tanya, which is not about hashgocho but about tzimtzum? It is well known that the GRO believed in tzimtzum kipshuto, and that is what the Alter Rebbe is criticising here. (The Michtov Me’Eliyohu tried to reconcile the GRO’s view with the Alter Rebbe’s, and show that the GRO really agreed with the Alter Rebbe, but see the Rebbe’s letter to Itche der Masmid, rejecting this idea.)
K
There were THREE cherems that the GRA placed against chassidim: 1777, 1781 and letters of 1796.
EACH of these were joined by numerous gedolim of that time. It is a long list of Rabbonim – many are well known and popular even today. For the list of names – open a history book!
Regarding the claim that שגגה שיצאה מלפני השליט:
Our chachomin and Gedolim have syata dishmaya not to be nichshal in “mistakes” (as it says Hashem Imo). To start thinking that they might be mistaken is to question our Emunas chachomin.
Vayaminu b’Hashem U’b’moshe avdo – the SAME level of emunah in Hashem applies to Moshe (or any Moshe of the dorr). If Hashem can’t make mistakes, neither can Moshe or the gedolim. (I think I actually heard this from a Habad chosid!).
K
To satisfy some reader’s curiousity, a am attaching a link to a photo of one of the GRA’s three cherems,(with list of names at bottom):
http://www.kedem-auctions.com/sites/default/files/55973/07.jpg
K
Funny that Ezra mentions the Nodeh B’Yehudah – the N.B. actually called chassidim “poshim” (sinners) and so is printed in his Sh”ut sefer to this very day! Does Chabad use the Nodeh B’Yehuda? Do they realize he called them poshim?!
K
Milhouse wrote: “The Alter Rebbe was on that level – רב תנא הוא ופליג. The GRO was not.”
LIES!! The GGA was on the level of a Rishon/Goan, while the Baal Hatanya was squarely an Acharon.
The GRA was able to openly argue with Rishonim. See Bi’ur Ha-Gra to Yoreh De’ah 179:13 where he states that the Rambam was wrongly misled by his philosophical pursuits.
K
Regarding the dispute between the GRA and the Baal Hatanya on Tzimtumim – there are many scholarly works that write about it, as we all know.
See for example: http://www.hashkafacircle.com/journal/R1_DS_Exist.pdf
K
Milhouse asks: “Are you seriously claiming that those who are ignorant of Chabad chassidus understand the Tanya better than those who have been steeped in chassidus, and have received the interpretation ish mipi ish from the author himself?! Are you really that deluded?”
Don’t kid yourself! Many Gedolim, even in our time, were “klor” in Tanya – better than any Chabadsker chossid.
Rabbi Mottel Gifter zt”l prided himself that he was an expert in Tanya, as did Rav Chaim Bloch zt”l and many others.
There is a full ability to master Tanya without the prerequisite to study contemporary Chabad chassidus.
It may make you feel better to think that only Chabad chassidim have the key to unlock the Tanya, but that is fiction. The Tanya is an open book for anyone to learn and fully understand.
Milhouse
Tanya is the torah shebichsav of chassidus, and K sounds exactly like a Protestant or a Karai, proclaiming sola scriptura, that the written Torah is an open book that everyone can approach equally, and derive whatever meaning they like from it. But even a sane Protestant would have to agree that when it comes to a passage like this, where the author refers to a specific person, the authors students and their students are more likely than anyone else to know whom he meant. (By the way, the academic article K linked to says exactly the same thing, that this passage refers to the GRO.)
About the Alter Rebbe being רב תנא ופליג, this is not my chiddush, of course. The Ragachover GAON said it. He only learned rishonim, and didn’t bother with the works of acharonim. The only exception he made was the Alter Rebbe, because he counts as a rishon.
By the way, thank you K for acknowledging that today the only real chassidus remaining is in Chabad (I would also add Breslov). But if you think the cherem was valid, and applies to us, then what the $#%# are you doing here? Why don’t you go away and leave us alone?
K
Milhouse asks: “what the $#%# are you doing here? Why don’t you go away and leave us alone?”
I strongly believe in kiruv rechokim, (have you heard of Prject Inspire?), especially many who are tinuk shenishba.
It is also my achrayus as a ben Torah to be marbitz the dvar Hashem while doing hochayach tochiach.
K
Ezra wrote: “So in K’s world, issuing a cherem against chassidim equals respecting their path as “divrei elokim chayim.” Poor Orwell must be spinning in his grave.”
Sometimes one godol (Rishon or Achron) will claim that the other made a mistake – but as Chazal tell us, in the city of Rav – the halacha is like Rav, while in the city of Shmuel – the halacha is like Shmuel.
K
Milhouse ” claims” that the Rogachover said that the Baal Hatanya was רב תנא ופליג. and he only learned rishonim but learned the Baal Hatanya (I presume the Shulchan Aruch and NOT the Tanya!) because he considered him a RISHON.
Well, which is it, did he consider him a TANA or a RISHON?! Or none of the above.
Milhouse
What a maroon. רב תנא הוא ופליג means someone, despite living in one era, ranks equal to the members of a previous era. Thus, Rav, who was an Amora, counts as a Tanna and is exempt from the rule that Amoraim can’t argue against the unanimous view of the Tannaim. The Ragatchover did not learn Acharonim. He did learn the Alter Rebbe, though, (both Shulchon Oruch and Tanya), because he considered him a rishon.
And yes, the Ragatchover was a “Chabadsker”, and therefore learned Tanya. The reason he concentrated on learning nigleh rather than chassidus, was because the Tzemach Tzedek gave him a brocho for success in nigleh.
To # 1
Who are you to Judge Anything. Your statement off the charts. Would you dare blot out Rabbi Kaduri name also whom was a friend to Us.. l dont think you would dare to even think about that.
no 7
no shaichus in parshas haToireh period….parshas “chassidus” yeah for sure maiselach and zemiros sure
Ezra
Who is “no 7”?
Someone who, in the best Litvishe tradition, and in flagrant violation of a posuk in this week’s parsha (speaking of “no shaichus”), shaves his beard…
…who once accidentally knocked a Gemara off a shelf, which opened to a page of Maharam Schiff, so of course that now makes him a great gaon…
…and sits around wondering why the whole world doesn’t beat a path to his door and acclaim him as a great gaon.
Pick up a sefer and actually learn something? Can’t be bothered. Improve in middos tovos? Too much work. Far easier to sit and post his “sure”s and leitzonus, with the hope that these will bring him the adulation he craves.
no 7
K speaks the emes ,,,most poskim did join the cheirem that still is valid ..the means will be different as far as implementing them however
Milhouse
The cherem was a terrible aveira; the only excuse the signatories had was that they were misled, and really thought the “kat” would soon dump halacha just as the Shabsai-Tzvi and Frank cults had done, so they had to try to save people from it. When time showed that they were mistaken, and chassidim, far from abandoning frumkeit, are more careful than others, they regretted it.
More than 100 years ago Reb Chaim Brisker said that there are no more misnagdim leshem shomayim, and anyone who is still a misnaged must be from those who were never leshem shomayim in the first place.
K and “no 7” are obviously from that category, resho’im lehach’is. They embrace and defend the false cherem, and therefore the halacha of someone who makes a false cherem applies to them. They deliberately join themselves to that old aveira, and it will drag them to gehennom.
K
I would be happy to be in Gehenim with the GRA!
If it is a mitzvah to be a misnaged – who says that it needs to be lishma (lshem shamayim)? Mitoch shelo lishma – ba lishma!
What makes you think we are “resho’im lehach’is”? Maybe we are l’tayovon!
K
It is well known that the cherem HaGra is valid and applies only to Chabad because they are the only real chassidim and only they fully satisfy the concerns that the GRA had when the cherem was issued..
no 7
again more of the same..is there real “chasidus” today its admirable to emulate ..however outward chitzonius with out the basics is not good for anyone
the derech HaGra doesnt need anyones haskomah his talmidim had to acquiese to the metzius but they never considered the easy way out to placate the masses
no 7
sorry some have painted themselves into a corner with 7th in the yerusha…this leads to all kinds of revision and teirutzim…mais neherag .etc.Rambam Ramban…intrepreting what the Rebbe meant…why would RBS”H choose one to cause so much strife and turmoil…i know theres a teiretz for that as well…ie many will reject etc…plain silliness
mendy
THE BEST THING WE CAN ALL DO IS EMULATE THE REBBE IN ALL THINGS AND AT ALL TIMES
בָּרוּךְ אַתָּה ה’ אֱ-לֹקֵינוּ מֶלֶךְ הָעוֹלָם שֶׁלֹּא חִסַּר בְּעוֹלָמוֹ כְּלוּם וּבָרָא בוֹ בְּרִיּוֹת טוֹבוֹת וְאִילָנוֹת טוֹבוֹת לֵ
did the vilna gaon be mhudor like the alter rebbe and wait to bentch only after seeing 2 trees- instead of the obligatory neccessary 1 tree?????? nof said say no mo
Milhouse
Really there’s nothing more to say about K. He has openly admitted that he believes the cherem was and is valid, which means he believes the Alter Rebbe was a rosho, and we are all in cherem. R Chaim Brisker already said all that needs to be said about such creatures as K. He said that nowadays (meaning over 100 years ago!) there is no such thing as a misnaged leshem shomayim. All those who were against chassidim for the right reasons had realised their error, and the only misnagdim left were those who were never in it leshem shomayim, but only out of sin’ah. So K is one of those resho’im. What more do we need to know?