Talk:Chabad Lubavitch/Archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).
Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

From the article body

To the one who keeps on changing this entry: Two points I'd like to make: #1- there are not three groups in Chabad, there is one group. Though there are certainly differences of opinion on what to PUBLICIZE and what not to. Also, there is no 'G-d' group- show me a list of names and I'll verify it. I am IN CHABAD and there are NO SUCH PEOPLE! (Even if there is ONE in Tzfat, isnt there at least ONE Satmar Jew who loves Zionism? That does put him as a 'sect' in Satmar!) #2- If you will bring down Bergers book, bring down the other books as well- ones that counter his arguments. Why link to a book written by someone who HIMSELF AKNOWLEDGES HAVING NEVER REALLY BEEN WITH CHABAD PEOPLE, as a description of Chabad, when there are other books like 'The Rebbe's Army', or books from Chaim Dalfin that directly respond to Bergers allegations. It is simply dishonest and disgusting to place a biased report in an online encyclopedia. A professor of christian-Jewish relations should tell you how to look at Moshiach- something that is purely a Halachic issue???!

Another point- look up the meaning of 'messianist' in the dictionary- it has a meaning, and it is not the same at all as 'Meshichist', LHavdil. 68.161.149.229.

Please do not insert comments about an article into the article body. The talk page exists for this purpose. I will revert any edit that includes more websites into the Chabad article. Too many clowns have popped along to insert links, add apologetics about the Rebbe and pretend there is no controversy. You're invited to this (or my personal) talk page to discuss the issue.
If you don't like Berger's book, please add Dalfin's and his criticism of Berger, and don't remove mention. Pages are reverted because edits are partisan, and I feel yours certainly are. JFW | T@lk 09:11, 15 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Regarding your first statement, I know of prominent Lubavitch Rabbis who insist Rav Schneerson a"h was not the Messiah; are you claiming they don't exist, or merely that they are lying to the public? Regarding your argument regarding worshipping Rav Schneerson a"h is "There are NO such people; ok maybe there are, but they're not very many". Well, that's what the article says. Regarding Berger's book, if you have counterviews from other authors, please bring them. As for whether or not Berger's arguments are correct, Wikipedia is not the place for deciding these debates, but rather the place for presenting the opposing positions. Finally, regarding the meaning of the word "Messianic", I have indeed looked it up in a dictionary:
mes·si·an·ic also Mes·si·an·ic
adj.
1. Of or relating to a messiah: messianic hopes.
2. Of or characterized by messianism: messianic nationalism.
Source: The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition Copyright © 2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company.
Don't you (and you claim all Lubavitchers) believe Rav Schneerson a"h is the Messiah? Jayjg 16:16, 15 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I think there is some unfair snide-ness in written tone here to the good Lubavitchers who have been kind enough to offer inside views on the movement. NPOV can ony be acheived through unbiased neutral language reportage of all relevant POVs. 68.161.149.229 makes a very good point that views on messiah are purely Halachic issues.Zestauferov 23:59, 16 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I disagree. The messiah question is the political bomb under Chabad, and it has ceased being a purely halachic issue. The article can be toned down, but too many anonymous editors have been coming here to suppress some very basic facts about Chabad. JFW | T@lk 00:24, 17 Aug 2004 (UTC)
I feel that JFW has treated these anonymous editors with far more respect than they have ever treated Wikipedia or the editors here. In my entire history on Wikipedia I have only encountered one Meshichist Lubavitcher who was willing to state his views, the one above. Note I say state, and not discuss, as I have yet to encounter one who will discuss anything. And, in fact, the article already provides "unbiased neutral language reportage of all relevant POVs", which is precisely what these meshichist editors are trying to suppress. Their M.O. is hit-and-run insertions of Messianic links and POVs into articles relating to Lubavitch and Judaism, in the process deleting any non-Messianic Lubavitch POVs and links. They do not provide the Lubavitch viewpoint, or even a summary of the differing Lubavitch viewpoints, but merely promote the viewpoint of one section of Lubavitch, their own. And one part of that viewpoint, that views on the messiah are "purely Halachic issues", I'm sure appeals to someone who is continually claiming that Netzarim are Orthodox Jews, but nevertheless is highly over-simplified at best. Jayjg 02:49, 17 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Most -> many

I changed "most" to "many" in regards to the amount of people that believe Rebbe Schneerson was the messiah

There is no proof that more than 50% of the Chabad Jews believed that Rebbe Schneerson was the Messiah. I'm sure there was a handful of them, but "most" isn't accurate. Rather, "many" will agree with both sides.

How familiar are you with Lubavitch Jews? Jayjg 04:02, 26 Aug 2004 (UTC)

AFAIK, no poll has been conducted amongst professed Chabad adherents as to their belief in the Messiahbility of the Rebbe. Therefore, I think "many" is a reasonable alternative, and "most" is premature. JFW | T@lk 15:42, 26 Aug 2004 (UTC)

PS I've had to protect the Menachem Mendel Schneerson page due to incessant vandalism. I have the feeling the vandals will shift their attention to this page in the near future. JFW | T@lk

162.84.234.246

First of all the real problem that ppl have with Chabad stems from the old Misnagid issue about there being a true leader of the Jewish people- someone who is truly on the level of Moshe Rabeinu in each generation. If this is accepted then the rest is not an issue: the Rebbe stated that the leader of the generation is the Moshiach of the generation and that THIS generation IS the generation of Moshiach. WE are going to be the ones greeting Moshiach and the Geula! All we have to do is add in Torah study, particularly relating to Moshiach and Geula, and add in Mitzvos and acts of goodness and kindness and this will hasten his arrival all the more quickly.

If this is accepted (and it has been the central issue for those who were against Chabad long before Gimmel Tamuz), then it is clear who Moshiach is. This is not my own personal belief that I put together- it is directly from the words of the Rebbe. If one has issue with this then they should study the words of the Rebbe directly.

Regarding the fact that the Rebbe is alive just as before, this is also the reality. It is based on the words of the Rebbe himself. It is not 'made up'. It is also based on many Torah sources. I can quote some of them if the moderator of this site allows room.

Being that the Rebbe is the only one who can speak in the name of Chabad, one must look at what he himself has said in order to know what Chabad is. If there is a Chabad Chassid who says otherwise, this is his own personal belief and not 'the' belief of Chabad. But in the larger picture, the Rebbe doesnt want people to just 'learn' about Chabad; he wants them to be affected by the message of Chabad: to get ready for Moshiach! To get things together and help others around to do the same; to add in acts of Mitzvos and Torah study (especially relating to Moshiach and Geula)

Regarding 'what' the Rebbe is, I'd like to clarify this. If someone were to walk into an operation for the first time in his life, and see five people with knives and masks and a sixth person lying on a table all cut up and bleeding, what would he think? Murderers! Likewise in many of the things here: one must study Chassidus in order to understand what the terminology is relating to the Rebbe. G-d is most certainly One and not comprised of other parts, Chas Vshalom (as is one of the 'thirteen principles of faith' that are broughts down by the Rambam) However from the 'creations' perspective, there is 'division' and this division and unity is what Chassidus is all about. It explains the entire picture. Now if one wishes to take it out of context, one most certainly can. However if studied in its source its clear intention is explaining the unity of G-d, and mans role in His creation (among other things.)

As stated above, I'm sure that there are some Satmar who support Israel, but why is it that these people are not given mention to in an encyclopedia? Why is it that Satmar 'stands' for anti-Zionism? The answer is clear: this is what the leader of Satmar taught and this is what they stand by. Just because there are some who disagree, doesnt make them 'the' Satmar view- or even 'a' satmar view, because it is their own personal view. If there are one or two people who say crazy things and they are part of Lubavitch, does that give them a 'group' on their own within Lubavitch? The answer is no.

Again regarding the current state of the Rebbe: based on the Rebbe's words himself, he is fully alive in the physical sense just as before- and even more than before. This may sound hard to digest, but this is what the Rebbe has said about the previuos Rebbe and this is most certainly the case. It is also based on many sources in Torah.

Relating to the word 'Messianism': surely you can use this word and get away with it completely logically, however it would be more befitting to use the word 'Meshichist' because not one Lubavitcher calls it 'Messianism'. The only point in using the word 'Messianist' is if one wishes to shock the reader into linking Chabad with, LHavdil, xtianity. If one has respect for his fellow Jew, he would not use words that are linked to things that offend people or label Jews in a bad way. In addition, according to the description of the word given above, it would then be fitting to use this word for ALL Jews! If one looks at any prayer book one will find literally hundreds of mentions of Moshiach and requests for him throughout the Siddur. In addition, one finds countless mentions of Moshiach throughout the Torah.

The bottom line is this: the belief of Chabad is based on the words of the Rebbe, and the Rebbe alone. Not myself or another Lubavitcher has the right to speak in the name of Chabad. The fact that the Rebbe is physically here (even if I dont see him- this is because of my own 'coarseness') or that he is Moshiach, these things are not open for discussion if one is going accroding to the Rebbe's words. Now one may ask 'but arent there many in Chabad who disagree?' the answer is that many who held (and still hold) positions of leadership in various areas felt and still feel a very strong problem with proclaiming these things outright. And I dont blame them: I would not explain these things if they were not being thrown out in the wrong way already! THe first approach to any Jew is Torah and Mitzvos and that Moshiach is coming now. If the person studies the words of the Rebbe and learns Chassidus, they will be certain about the identity of Moshiach as well. And this is 100% according to Halacha and TOrah sources- not at all outside of Halacha, Chas VShalom. The main point is for a Jew to be a good Jew and 'live with Moshiach'- to truly be a spiritual light to the physical world, until the physical world is one with the spiritual and there is not a difference between the two. This is the main point. However this cannot be realized and WOULD not be realized if not for the Rebbe (the Moshe Rabeinu of this generation.)

What seems to have happened is that many who, for whatever reason, are not in the position to voice this have been a reason for others to go a step further and say that 'I dont know'. And then for people who have not studied the words of the Rebbe directly to even proclaim that they 'dont think' that he is Moshiach. Those who claim this are very few (and there are some who are Torah scholars as well, but it seems that in this area, they simply are not paying attention to the clear words of the Rebbe. I honest to goodness cannot understand how someone who studies the words of the Rebbe could say anything different- I'd like to speak with one of them! I personally dont know of even ONE around me who is learned and holds this way.)

Are you getting a one-sided opinion here? Of course. This is simply me writing my objective view on what I see and know. The only truly objective view that you'll be getting is from G-d Himself. Even a moderator for the encyclopedia will be a biased view- he is not educated in Chabad and does not neccessarily know the teachings of the Rebbe.

In short: I am not going to come in here and correct the page every day. But I am stating here a fact: many points in this page's description of Chabad are simply WRONG. The view that you are attributing to some in Chabad about whether the Rebbe is alive... is simply incorrect. This argument may exist, but not in Chabad; it may exist between Berger and Lubavitch. In addition, several other things are incorrect, but when I change it, the moderator changes it back.

As a side note, however much I think Berger is wrong and is truly acting on ignorance and arrogance (and I hope he'll study some Chassidus along the way in his journey through Lubavitch), I think that he has inevitably bumped into some truth along the way- here is a link: http://www.moshiachlisten.com/jun_26_04.html

I'd like to stress once again: why on earth wont an 'objective' encyclopedia place a link to counter arguments to a person who is not at all qualified in this field to begin with? If a true Rav who people already respected from a Torah standpoint, wrote a book, then this is one thing (though if there are couter-arguments they should be included as well...) all the more so if the person has ZERO qualifications to even speak about Chabad...?! Place a link or two to books that respond to his accusations, or dont place any links or referrals to him in the first place. You cannot just speak about him and call that 'objective'. Maybe link to 'The Rebbe's Army' or Dalfins books or one of the many other online resources that explain the issues involved here. (Maybe if a person doesnt have an objective reality and a definite future in their own life, they try to make sure that no one else has one either. According to the Rebbe (and he is the Rebbe to all Jews, not just Lubavitchers) first of all, G-d is everywhere- for real. Also, every single minutest thing that happens in this universe is by divine plan. Everything is being created anew each moment. Also, we are living in/immediately preceding the era of Moshiach and must prepare for the complete Redemption. These are absolute and definite realities. With these 'beliefs' in mind, one does not need to put down other people in order to feel ok. If Dr Berger were to take these things as fact, then I dont see why he would feel the need to put down and ridicule an entire group of Jews.)

The main point is that each one of us decide to take upon ourselves an extra Mitzva and to add in Torah study- and help those around us in this direction as well. It is through this that we will merit the immediate revelation of Moshiach with the complete Geula, may it be immediately! (and we'll spend Yom Kippur in the Beis Hamikdash with Moshiach!)

PS- I dont think that there is a single Lubavitcher who does not pray to see the Rebbe with their own physical eyes in a plain and simple way, just as every Jew requests and asks by HaShem to bring Moshiach each and every day. The Rebbe taught (and this is directly from other Torah sources as well) that the mere request and 'demand' by G-d to bring the Geula (The Final Redemption) hastens its arrival. This is part of what G-d wants from us: to demand and ask by Him to bring about the goal of all of Creation- the times of Moshiach, may it be now.

PPS- Another point that is incorrect in the article is that 'no Rabbinic authority outside of Chabad accepted his Messiahship' (or something like that) This is incorrect. There are hundreds (I believe over a thousand) of signatures of Rabbonim who signed proclaiming the Rebbe as BeChezkas Moshiach- many of them non-Lubavitchers. In addition, there's a letter from Rabbi Soloveitchik A'H that I saw- here is the link (towards the middle of the page): http://www.rabbiyess.com/Is_This_Kosher.html

Also, this is what the former chief Rabbi of Israel (R' Mordechai Eliyahu) had to say after his visit with the Rebbe: "I saw that no secret is hidden from him, and I mean that simply and explicitly. He knows all of the Talmud, Poskim (legal precedents) and in the Mystical works his understanding is VERY VERY deep. He is the master of light. He is a master of all the Torah. And is an expert on everything that is happening in Israel. His face shines like an angel of G-d and he himself is higher than any angel. He is the greatest Torah master in our generation and no one is even close to him. And together with this he worries for every Jew in the world."

Another point is that the life of a Tzaddik is to begin with not a physical one- his entire being is a spiritual existence. In this case, 'after' and 'before' are not relevant relating to his 'being here'. IN addition, the Rebbe is not a person per se; he is a 'Living Torah', so to speak. His entire existence and every movement, thought, and spoken word, are completely divinely intended and guided. In this case, that would mean that his entire existence is sort of an instruction to each one of us. The Rebbe would not accept someone to merely say 'hi' and 'bye'- he always made sure to look at the persons soul and reveal something. On the other hand the Rebbe did not usually just tell people what to do, but rather looked at them and spoke with them in a way that revealed something so deep that a flame has been ignited inside, and the actions that result afterwards are a product of this meeting. It is not a earthly expierience (or possibly the MOST earthly expeience.)

http://Chabad.co.nr has some videos of the Rebbe, as does Chabad.org ( http://www.chabad.org/multimedia/media.asp?AID=132863 ) and several other sites. While it states in Talmud that 'no two minds are alike' (and therefore no two Jews are expected to be exactly the same in their thoughts and opinions...) nonetheless, it would be beneficial for each person to see the Rebbe (in this period, one of the ways is through a video)- to see a truly holy person and a role model to look to for important matters pertaining to life in general and particularly regarding matters dealing with one's heart and soul. Merely looking at the face of a Tzaddik has an impact on a person. Unsigned by User:162.84.234.246.

162.84.234.246, if you feel this way, please rewrite (or rather edit) the article in a way that incorporates the view of both Chabad and the outside critics/skeptics. The general public has a poor understanding of the whole concept of ruchnius (or metaphysics, for that matter), so you'll have to rely on much metaphor to bring your points accross.
I admit not having read your entry closely, and I also admit to not looking at the Rebbe's video.
I will not state my views here on whether the Rebbe is Moshiach or not. You are free to represent this point-of-view in this article, but the encyclopedia will only be truly objective if you tolerate that other people's view is also recorded, namely that he was a creature of flesh and blood who may have been a superb leader but departed from this world in 1994. JFW | T@lk 19:29, 20 Sep 2004 (UTC)

This 'simple fact' that you state about who and what he is and was, is a completely subjective statement and is in no way any more 'absolute' that the most vocal Meshichist. If one were to write an article on a religion that claimed that this world does not exist and that human beings are not real, then I believe it would not be honest reporting to state events that occur within their group in a Western factual way. If, suppose, they believed that cows fly when no one is looking, would the report go 'and they believe that when the cows are sleeping in the locked barn, the cows are really flying...' or would the article read 'they believe that the cows fly at night'. The latter is more objective while the former is more 'comfortable' to the Western ear- though not at all more accurate. Does a single human being on this planet KNOW what will happen in a single moment from now? Even if they predict it a million times over, and it occurs exactly as they perdicted, does that mean that they KNOW what will happen? GOing even further, does anyone really know ANYTHING? A person can CLAIM to know something, and his fellow can choose to hold this way or not. However even a statement so basic as 'what goes up must come down' is not at all 'absolute' or 'objective'. Rather, we know that based on our senses when we perform action x, then y is what happens. We dont know WHY this happens (and even quantum mechanics and the deepest of string theory etc. cannot say anything for certain- they are merely trial and error, as well as theoretical logic.) This is the basis of all science- both physical and mental. The basis is simply logical deductions based on our senses. This is in no way reliable to anyone who thinks for a moment what we're doing: beings that are limited to bodies and are extremely small and fragile, are deciding what things are and how things work... Not to say that we're getting nowhere, but the basic point of trusting the Western G-d (ie. the science of cause and effect, pleasure, and a general nihilist perspective) is truly not at all what anyone in their right mind could call 'objective'.

Not to drift way out there, but the point that I'm trying to make is that it seems that the goal of this encyclopedia is to allow true objectivism- as true as humans can get to it on their own- through having input from everyone. If this is the goal, then to ridicule ANY belief is by default not being objective- even if the idea sounds completely laughable to the Western ear.

After rereading what you wrote, it seems that you are not meaning to state a fact, but rather asking that all views be stated. If this is the case, then how can I possibly speak for those who ridicule Chabad? I can try to say that they simply do not understand, or that they are acting on impulse and not on logic, but how can I, as someone who is trying to follow the Rebbe and Chabad, write about views that make no sense to me (and I honestly do not understand a single one of the arguments that are made, being that with a little Torah study it is very clear and not a question at all...)? From another perspective, why do these views have to be presented in the first place? Look at it objectively: the article is on Chabad, not humanity. THe article should speak about Chabad, and not about what people think of Chabad- this is up to the reader to decide. However if it must be presented for whatever reason, then the least I would expect is to bring things from a semi reliable source, and not from a professor of xtian history- how can he comment on Chabad??? And as I tried to mention before, is you must bring him down, then at least place links to articles that refute his accusations etc. Also, some books of praise for Lubavitch couldnt hurt either- 'The Rebbe's Army' (by Sue Fishkoff) is supposed to be a good book (and was meant to be an 'objective' view from her experiences...), among others.

Regarding the issue of what other people 'hold', this is self understood- the majority of the world seems to be partially deeply stuck in Golus and sees things in and expects the future of things, to behave in an independant physical order. In reality, we are at the threshold of the Redemption and at this time one should try to get over these limitations and these boundaries. So when someone is told that a certain person is more than a regular Jew, but a prophet and the leader of the generation- the Moshiach of the generation, this surely comes as a surprise to someone who is unfortunately still in the Golus state of mind. I truly hope that if anyone reads this that they will go and study about Moshiach and Geula and/or ask their local Rabbi for a class in it. They should also add in their own Mitzvos and good deeds and actions with their fellow man. Also, if one has many non-Jews in their surroundings, they should try to help them by explaining the Seven Noahide Laws and the purpose of Creation etc.

I'd like to add another very important thing: contrary to what xtianity has been preaching for the past 2000 years, Judaism, LHavdil, does not believe Moshiach to be G-d, Chas VShalom. Judaism does not even hold him to be anything on his own- he is simply 'the annointed one'- someone who is truly at the highest of levels, but not independantly from G-d. It is G-d's complete Redemption that we await, with our righteous Moshiach as the leader. Therefore when one speaks of Moshiach, people seem to automatically link it to the xtian view, and they shy away from the concept altogether (or at least shy away from taking the 'concept' a step into reality.) In truth it is a Jewish concept from the begining- where did the xtians get it from in the first place? Therefore, when discussing anything relating to Moshiach, it must be truly based on Torah and not ones own preconceived notions. (These notions are possibly the product of ones childhood thoughts on the subject, or maybe based on other things that one heard throughout the years- but often times it is mostly not based on true Torah sources.)

Your post-modernism is striking. We can't actually know anything for sure, according to your opening lines. I never said that. I only stated, and will state again, that if you remove mention of the "general opinion" that the Rebbe was a mortal, you are violating the principles of a neutral encyclopedia.
Please note that you really should be more concise in your postings. A point that cannot be expressed in a few lines will generally not be taken. JFW | T@lk 09:04, 21 Sep 2004 (UTC)

This is an encyclopedia, so I dont want to be writing too short...

In answer to your post: That principle of us, as whoever we are, not knowing anything for sure, is what I would think is the driving force and the logic behind a website such as this: ie. that no one, on their own, neccessarily has the full perspective, and input is needed from others... Although if one takes that just a little bit further, it is apparent that if one needs information from another person to fill a picture, then one can never be certain of the picture- ever, being that humanity and individuals are dynamic and changing, and most importantly- limited to what they can see, hear, smell, touch, think etc.

This leads to a personal quest of what is real and what is not- or rather what is important and what is not. And ultimately to a choice of what one wishes to view in his or her reality. The result is that a venue such as this website can serve as 'food' for ones understanding, but in no way represents a complete reality.

Therefore, in any article- and especially ones relating to 'absolutisms', one should be careful to realize that this is merely a human 'report' and not 'information' per se. It is 'what I observe' or 'what I think' etc.

However being that it is trying to be as 'objective' as possible, it should make sure to try and take as much of the 'I' out of the report.

Relating to the article on Lubavicth, I have to say that were this a state-run media where a certain view is encouraged, then it is proper to write an article in a way that belittles a belief that may seem foreign to ones habitual views on the world. However if you want a true picture, it is not as its stated there...

The truth is this: based on the words and actions of the Rebbe, and based on various sources in Torah, it is a very simple conclusion to a Chabad Chassid. Now this conclusion does not have to be forced down anyones throats, but it is nonetheless the 'reality on the ground'. If you ask a Chabad Chassid about what they thought 10, 20, 30 years ago, I can guarantee you that it was a common 'knowledge' even way back then (I dont recall that far back, but from what I have heard and seen... and from what I know of the bond between a Chassid and his Rebbe, it is simply not possible any other way- not with this Rebbe for sure)

Being that we are in the final moments of this exile and the final Redemption of Jews and mankind is truly imminent, it is also a time of confusion and suffering. It is the darkest point before the true light. (Though a portion of the 'True Light' is already breaking through)

The arguments that exist are not on the core of the issue, but on the surface of it: for a Chabad Chassid to claim that he is waiting for someone else to come along, is simply not a perspective based on the teachings of Chabad or the Rebbe. Sure one is always free to think as he wishes, but it cannot be said in the name of Chabad (or even a 'sect' inside of it) The bond that the Rebbe demands from those who wish to have something to do with him, is a bond and a dedication that is beyond what can be explained without study of the Rebbe's words oneself.

If it must be 'labeled' then the label is like this: according to the Rebbe's words and actions, it is clear where we are, what we are facing and who the human being is that is annointed by G-d. There are many who dont feel at this level yet (or feel that we are not 'fit' to make our own proclamations), or who feel that such talk will 'turn people off', and they have their reasons and I am not going to judge them for what they dont feel they can say. However every Chassid that is connected with his Rebbe, by default looks at him as the leader of the generation and the Moshiach of the generation (and this is the generation of the Redemption) From a Halachik standpoint and a Torah standpoint there are many instances where such events and situations are mentioned, so it is not outside the scope of Judaism at all, Chas VShalom.

Regarding how others might look at it? This must vary: there are probably those who have never liked Chabad, and this is just another thing on the list that they can show around (in other words a baseless dislike- no true reasons, only that it showed up somehow and was fostered...) Then some are probably just afraid of such talk and wish to keep their distance until something can be resolved that everyone agrees on. And still others are genuinely curious about it and wish to learn what Moshiach is about etc... Then there is someone like Berger, who for some reason decided that he has become a big Rabbi and knows all Torah sources and knows what is or is not part of Torah-true Judaism... I honestly dont know what drives his desire to write what he does/has, but if the end result is not in the spirit of Ahavas Yisroel and growth amongst Jews, then there is definitely something wrong there.

May all Jews have a good and a sweet year, and may this year be a year of goodness and open Brachos for all Jews, in a way of truth and true happiness, from the Source of all goodness- Hashem Himself. And most importantly, may this be the year that we merit Moshiach with the complete Geula (Redemption)- may it be now! (As we say at the end of Yom Kippur- 'LShana Haba BYerushalayim!')

Other Chabad chassidim feel that their understanding of the words and nature of Rav Schneerson a"h are correct, and that your understanding is incorrect. And, of course, many other people besides Chabad chassidim have their own undestandings of these matters, which they believe are correct as strongly as you believe that you are correct. Merely asserting that you know the "Truth" and that therefore all others are mistaken is not good enough. Jayjg 04:20, 27 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Being that I am in Chabad and try to be a Chabad Chassid, I can tell you this: I have yet to speak with one Lubavitcher that I know who will argue with what I said above. If you study the words and actions of the Rebbe, and study topics in Torah relating to Moshiach and Geula, the conclusion is not too difficult (even though the CIRCUMSTANCES are difficult, and no one disagrees with this- it is described all over how the times of Moshiach will be a time of absolute confusion...) Again, if you personally know a Lubavitcher who claims otherwise, please let me know what they say- and not out of their own 'feelings', but based on what Lubavitch is- the words, actions and instructions of the Rebbe.

I would strongly recommend that anyone who wishes to understand this issue should sit down and study the topics dealing with Moshiach from Torah sources, and not just judge it based on what they have always felt was 'the Torah way'. Feelings and ideas on what Moshiach is are often times based on ideas that developed on their own during ones younger years, and do not neccessarily reflect Torah-true sources at all. In addition, if one wishes to learn more about the Rebbe, the best way is through studying his words- and there are many books now available in English with talks and letters by the Rebbe. Also, videos of the Rebbe are helpful as well (as is known about the impact of simply looking at the face of a Tzaddik- how much more so the Moshe of the generation)

May we merit the complete revelation of Moshiach with the Final Redemption, immediately! (Then we wont have to go into discussions on what when where who how etc., because the truth will be visible to all- as it says that in the days of Moshiach '...the knowledge of G-d will fill the land just as water covers the sea')

Amen to that, and Good Mo'ed. Your views have been logged. You may care to wonder if anyone will take any notice, though. JFW | T@lk 00:59, 3 Oct 2004 (UTC)

All I can say is that at this point is that no one should edit this article until they have read The Rebbe, the Messiah and the Scandal of Orthodox Indifference, by Rabbi David Berger. Anon's messianic comments are just the tip of the iceberg. There are a great many rabbis who feel that most of Chabad is longer Hasidic Judaism, it is no longer Orthodox Judaism. The Chabad Hasidic Judaism we knew in the 1930, 50s and 70s simply no longer exists. It has been replaced by a cult of personality that is turning into a carbon-copy of early Christianity, complete with the growing belief that the their late Rebbe actually was God incarnate. Fascinating, from a historical point of view. RK 13:09, Oct 3, 2004 (UTC)

Anon was hoping to inspire us by making us watch a video of the Rebbe. Quod non. Lots of people have been trying to eliminate the Berger paragraph, claiming that "he can't speak because he's never met any Chabadniks".
By the way, Robert, The Chabad Hasidic Judaism we knew in the 1930, 50s implies that you were around at the time - I thought you weren't quite as old! JFW | T@lk 13:29, 3 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Um, well "knew" through books, and adults in my congregation when I was a kid. I'm only 36. My personal involvement, rather superficial I'm afraid, with Chabad Lubavitch was from 1991-1998. I originally based my undertanding of the movement on what I saw, and what people older than me spoke about. This led me to perceive Chabad as one form of Hasidic Judaism, just as Orthodox as any other group. The articles I read about it demonstrated Chabad to be a regular Orthodox group, with a few interesting features. However, after the Rebbe's stroke I paid more attention to the differences between Chabad and other Hasidic groups, and found that it had slowly diverged from Hasidism, almost imperceptibly, until it had become its own new form of Orthodoxy. With the passing of the Rebbe and the rise of second-coming messianism, I read with grave concern about the parallels between it and early forms of Christianity. I then totally ignored all the concerns and kept on going to Chabad, because I really liked it, and they had so much to offer. Only after I saw advertisements in The Jewish Week, proclaiming that the rebbe was the messiah, did I stop going to Chabad. I realized then that Chabad had already changed even before I started going to Chabad, but I just had not noticed. RK 14:37, Oct 3, 2004 (UTC)

If I may ask, do you judge Israel solely based on the New York Times and other American and Western sources, or do you endeavor to read from sources that are possibly more aware of the reality there? In this case, for one to read articles in the paper and Bergers book and stand on 'the top of a mountain' claiming that they now understand what Chabad is, is absolutely ridiculous. Again, it is very very sad that people cannot look at Judaism as Judaism, but rather need to compare it to xtianity (which unfortunately many are more familiar with in our society) in order to gain perspective. Imagine that there were never a concept called xtianity and you grew up with the Torah, and you see numerous instances in black and white where Moshiach can come in this way- though he doesnt 'have' to, it is nonetheless one of the 'ways' that can be. The trouble is that people now ask 'then why not go with xtianity?' and this is truly a question based on lack of knowledge in Torah sources relating to Moshiach, because the reason Jews have never believed that the person they worship is Moshiach is because he not only did not fulfill any of the requirements as written clearly in Tanach, but the result of him and those after him who created the religion was actually the exact opposite of the predictions of that which Moshiach will help bring about (for example freedom for the Jewish ppl- look at the freedom that we recieved because of that religion... and much much more)

Another important point is that some people have the idea of Moshiach from xtianity completely- that he is more than a man, that he is a G-d in and of himself, Chas Vshalom. In fact, the word 'Moshiach' means 'annointed one' and the very meaning of annointed implies that he is given something from someone else, in this case G-d is annointing him to be the leader to take the Jews out of Exile and help usher in the era of the final redemption. However many people either believe Moshiach to be like the xtians claim- only that he will be a live person etc. OR they believe that our Moshiach is simply 'not like theirs'- that anything they claim about him, is by us the exact opposite. Both of these perspectives are incorrect. The correct perspective, if one wills to gain it, can only come from study of the sources inside their original texts (or the many English books about the Torah perspective on Moshiach,) and I dont think that anyone would disagree with this.

I dont think that this is the forum to bring down all the sources relating to the core of the issue, but I am merely trying to point out some very apparent flaws in the judgement that people seem to be quick at making regarding Chabad.

The Torah way is this: do and learn as G-d wants. Work on helping others around oneself in this way as well. And in these days, it is vital to study areas in Torah relating to Moshiach and the Final Redemption, and to help ones family and friends in this as well. Rambam says that we do not know the details of what will occur in the days of Moshiach, and we most certainly are in those days. One thing is clear though: they will be/are not smooth days in the plain sense of the word when it comes to belief. I forget who said this (it may have been R' Elimelech) but it certainly rings true today, he said that in the days of Moshiach there will be two angels on either side of the world, each holding a rope, and they will be swinging this rope from one side to the other; this rope is the rope of Emuna, and only those who cling on very tight will be able to hang on. (I dont recall the full details of the parable...)

If one is serious in wanting to understand this very central issue (-read the translation of any prayer book- practically the whole prayer is about the Redemption and returning to Eretz Yisroel...) then one must study the Torah sources and not rely on an expert in xtian history (Berger) to tell you what to think. Nor should one rely on their instincts alone when it comes to something as central to Judaism as Moshiach. Objectively speaking, if the climax of Creation is the era of Moshiach, why would we be so shallow as to try and compare it to something in the past- we should look at that which is written in the Torah and look to the future! There are many jokes about how when Moshiach comes what will happen- some will say 'ah I dont like his nose' others will say 'a Litvak? No way, I'm not with him', some will say 'Messiah? Thats a xtian concept, not a Jewish one' and still others will say 'I'm just fine in my little exile...' All these things have some truth to them- we must get out of our man-made boundaries and realize what is upon us- not some theoretical 'state of mankind', but a practical reality that is unfolding in front of our eyes, and with our actions in our own lives and help to those around us, it will be very soon that G-d will allow Moshiach to take us out of exile and bring the final Geula! May it be now! (The Rebbe said as a prophesy that the redemption is happening now! That any moment now we will merit the complete Geula! He didnt say it as a hope or a dream, but as a prophesy! All we have to do is to do our part in our own lives and help those around us and this will speed it up in a good way (as it is known that many bad things are related about the generation of Moshiach- but they do not HAVE to occur if the people are in the proper state, as we most certainly are- the Jews are in the loftiest state today (though not neccessarily out of our own choice, but this is what we were given...,) we most certainly deserve Moshiach in a peaceful way...)

I guess in short: if someone is turned off by what Chabad holds, then they should learn the sources and strive to be on an even HIGHER level than Chabad in their desire and preparations for Moshiach. There is no excuse to just belittle a group of Jews based on fragmented information- or even first hand experience, if it is not based on serious prior research in the area. If Chabad is wrong, then fight fire with fire- be better in this area! Go out and spread the word that Moshiach is coming and we must prepare; help Jews be better Jews; help family members in their Torah observance; treat a fellow Jew as the G-dly soul that he is; be a light to yourself and those around you!

Best wishes, and a Gmar Chasima Tova to all Jews for a good, happy and successful year, with the ultimate success of the bringing of Moshiach!

PS- If a non-Jew wants info on Moshiach etc. there is a lot of information online on this subject- Moshiach is not only for the Jews but rather for mankind as well. One site is Moshiach.com - its a pretty good site with a lot of articles. This site is good for Jew and, LHavdil, non-Jew, alike.


EDIT: 20 Tishrei, 5764

I'd like to add that the bond between a Chossid and the Rebbe existed 10-20 years ago, in a certain sense, on an even stronger level than today. Its only that today this bond is open and known to all, whereas before it used to be something that 'wasnt anyones business' outside of Chabad (although there were certainly some who spoke against it back then as well, but they were not given any credibility- after all, who is going to claim to know better than the Rebbe?) In truth, the concept that I hear people raising about 'G-d centered or Rebbe centered?' is truly based on ignorance. A similar argument existed at the time of the Baal Shem Tov, and unfortunately this argument matches very closely to the argument of Korach and his friends. The concept of a Rebbe (stands for 'R osh B nei Y isroel') is central to Judaism and is something that many people dont realize is really part of our Torah. Moshe Rabeinu, the leader of the Jewish people, was more than just a leader- he was on a state where he was the intermediary between G-d and the nation, and in addition, his concern was completely for the Jewish people and nothing else- it superceded his dedication even to Hashem! (Though in truth this bond and love for the poeple, according to Kaballa, is actually an expression OF G-d in Moshe, and therefore he was merely embodying a will of G-d that was concealed...) We are taught that there is a Moshe Rabeinu in each generation. In our generation it is the Rebbe. There is not a single individual who can even come anywhere close to him when it comes to caring about each and every single Jew that exists- regardless of their standing or actions. To him, each Jew is a treasure and a complete world (speak with anyone who has gone to see him- at the moment you look at his eyes, all that exists is you; all that matters is your present and future) In addition, the Rebbe's knowledge and understanding of Torah truly surpasses in an immeasurable way anyone alive today. And to top it off, we are speaking of someone who has spoken countless prophesies that have fully materialized (almost everyone I know has had a 'miracle story' that occured either with themselves or a family member) All these things point to the fact that he is the Moshe Rabeinu of the generation, who is by default the Moshiach of the generation as well.

Again I'd like to point out that I am only mentioning all this because the topic has already been raised. Were I to have a choice on the topic, I'd wish to dwell on study in Torah about Moshiach and Geula, as well as practically speaking adding in practice of Mitzvos and Ahavas Yisroel. This is the best way to bring Moshiach.

May we merit the coming of Moshiach, with the complete Geula with each and every single Jewish man and woman, boy and girl, together with Avrohom Yitzchok and Yaakov and all the others, together as one, to the Third Beis Hamikdosh in Yerushalayim, immediately!

Dear user, may I politely ask you to stop preaching. I hope you realise that Wikipedia is not a messaging board, and you certainly not influencing anyone's opinion by writing what you do. We are actually writing an encyclopedia, and you are fully entitled to contribute provided that you adhere to neutral point-of-view and several other very basic policies.
Most Jews contest that the Rebbe was the Moshe Rabbeinu of the generation. The Lithunanian mitnagedim would reserve that title for any of the Roshei Yeshiva, and the Sefardim may prefer to nominate Rabbi Ovadia Yosef or Rabbi Kaduri.
RK correctly observes that Chabad has some very important differences from other forms of Chassidus.
The talk page is now >46 kilobytes, filled mainly with your epistles. I suggest you stop editing this page and direct your attention to the writing of an encyclopedia. JFW | T@lk 08:45, 6 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I was under the impression that this was a 'discussion board' on the topic at hand, so I figured that if changing the article myself to reflect the reality of the situation was not going to work (because it was changed back twice) then all I can do is give over the perspective as best as I can (-and not just in summary,) and whoever is in charge of writing this article for the encyclopedia can see where the article is off and what should be changed. Or if they wish to keep it as is, then at least a person should be able to read this discussion board and see the points that I've tried to raise about the accuracy of the article.

In case you dont understand my point, I have been trying hard to explain why Berger is not a source to be quoted, and I've been trying to explain that there are no two ways about it in Chabad (and several other things, like the fact that the term 'messianists' in incorrect.) While these points are important to point out, it is equally important (if not more important) to point out what the Rebbe has said about our time and our mission.

With regards to watching a video of the Rebbe- a person is free to do as they wish (and I'm not trying to convince anyone to become a Lubavitcher- not in the slightest bit,) but I am suggesting that as it is said in Torah, to see the face of a Tzaddik (-all the more so the Rebbe-) is good for oneself, that it would be good for a person to see some clips (besides for the purely informational aspect.)

Just as a side point, in reference to the concept of 'Moshe Rabeinu of the Generation', I brought a quote from Mordechai Eliyahu about the Rebbe above (way up.) In addition, I'm sure you know that Rav Kaduri has visited the Rebbe in Crown Heights (one of the visits is online at htt://chabad.co.nr ) And with regards to Misnagdim to Chabad etc. all I'm trying to point out is that its not a new dislike but an old one which is based on lack of information; only now Chabad is a much easier target. (In other words its not like 'oh now those Chabad have taken it waaay too far, NOW we have to get rid of them...' but rather its 'look at what they are not embaressed to say, now we can prove who they really are...' And the solution to all this is: Moshiach)

Besides, if one watches any video of the Rebbe giving out dollars [for Tzedaka], one will find that possibly the majority of those on line are either from other Chassidim, Litfish (ie. 'Misnagdim') or someone who just identifies himself as 'Jewish' (and then there were many who werent Jewish either) The types of people who went there to see him is anyone from the President and PM of Israel (and all other positions in Israel that you can think of,) to big Rabonim, to regular Jews, to non-Jews, Mayors, Senators, and the list includes just about every type of person around! The outcome of this information is simple: while there is surely a remnant of the Misnagdik dislike for Chassidism (and thus for Chabad), nonetheless there are countless Jews and [LHavdil] non-Jews from all walks of life who would easily call the Rebbe the 'Moshe Rabeinu of the generation' (how about Yitzchok Rabin? http://www.chabad.org/multimedia/media.asp?AID=132863 ) - Unsigned by User:151.204.128.16

This is, indeed, a discussion board on the article Chabad Lubavitch. Your point is that David Berger's book should not be quoted. Most Wikipedia contributors agree that it should, and you lose.
I agree the term "meschichist" should be used, rather than "messianic", to avoid confusion with proselytising sects, yemach shemam ve-zichram.
In my previous post I was not talking about anti-Chabad sentiment, while I'm sure there is plenty of it. I simply took issue with your claim that the Rebbe was the Moshe Rabbeinu (for the outsiders: Moses) of his generation. Most Jews, when asked who the Moshe Rabbeinu of the generation was, would not have answered: "The Rebbe". This concludes the issue.
As I stated, you are entitled to work on this article (and I encourage you to), but adherence to policy is an important requirement. Removal of the Berger book will land you in trouble, and so will insertion of endless external links. Would you object if I archived part of this talk page? JFW | T@lk 14:05, 6 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../c/h/a/Talk%7EChabad_Lubavitch_Archive_1_32c1.html"