Schvartzes?

Rabbi Shmuely Boteach writes:

Last week I delivered a sermon based on the Torah portion of the week and which compared Moses, the great Jewish redeemer, with Abraham Lincoln, the martyred American emancipator. When I finished, I was approached by an acquaintance who happens to be an Orthodox Jewish engineer. He seemed, up until that time, to be devout, educated, and sophisticated. But what he told me was sacrilegious, ignorant, and primitive.

This gentleman maintained that Lincoln was no hero, seeing as he had freed a people who were the descendants of Ham, the son of Noah, who was cursed for humiliating his father. “Ham’s children are black, and are condemned by God to eternal slavery,” he said. “There was even a rebbe in Poland who predicted that Abraham Lincoln would be shot for liberating a people against God’s wishes.”

I looked this man in the eye and said to him, “I’m confused. Judaism believes that every man is judged according to his actions. Now you are telling me that every black person in the world is cursed for something an ancestor did millennia ago. We Jews don’t believe in Original Sin, and we don’t believe in vertical accountability. So how can you tell me something so abominably racist like the fact that blacks are cursed?”

He responded that I was denying scripture. I told him that his views were repugnant to everything Judaism stood for in terms of the equality of all mankind.…

I remember my shock at seeing a book written by Rabbi Ahron Soleveitchik that strongly stated that racism of any kind has no place in Judaism. Why was I shocked? Because every Chabad and haredi rabbi I then knew was profoundly racist.

I was once driving with a head shaliach (the senior rabbi sent by the Chabad Rebbe to a particular area). We passed a bus stop at which a black man was kissing a white woman. The rabbi reacted with disgust. "It's unnatural!" he screamed. "What is?" I asked. "Schvartes and whites shouldn't mix. Races shouldn't mix," he answered. I asked him if that was true even if the "schvartze" had converted. He fumbled for an answer, finally settling on "that depends on the situation." He hastened to add that the black convert would be a full Jew, and really should be able to marry any Jew, regardless of color. "So," I asked him, "would you let your son marry a black convert or the daughter of black converts?" "No!," he said. "Why not?" I asked. "It just wouldn't be right," he said.

I used to write off this insanity as the side effects of living in or frequenting Crown Heights, with its years of racial tension. But the truth cuts much deeper. Orthodoxy in general and haredim specifically demonize the Other. Nothing is more "Other" than a black man.

I remember another haredi rabbi teaching that tselem elokim, the idea that man is made in God's image, only applies to Jews. And we have the assertion in the Tanya, the so-called bible of Chabad hasidut, that every kindness a non-Jew does for Jews is only done for selfish reasons; non-Jews are not capable of altruism.

Boteach is right. Racism, as Rabbi Ahron Soleveitchik said, has no place in Judaism. It's just too bad so many haredim don't realize this, and that they have not realized it for so long.

Comments

[Chaim]

Sounds like the guy you were driving with was a real putz. Just because they are a shliach doesnt mean they represent every single member of Chabad, you outa know that and be honest with yourself.

Just like every black male in crown heights who curses at me that hitler should have finished the job doesnt mean every single black male in crown heights is a horrible person.

Even if it was a head shliach so what, I bet you more of the young guys today are more respectful.

[Shalom]

Shmarya, if you read the series "Lessons in Tanya" there is a note at the end of chapter one that reads, "It should be noted that among the nations of the world there are also to be found those whose souls are derived from kelipat nogah. Called “the pious ones of the nations of the world,” these righteous individuals are benevolent not out of selfish motives but out of a genuine concern for their fellow." I would say there are plenty of examples of non Jews doing selfness, true acts of kindness: everytime someone jumped on a grenade in war, or risked their life to save another, or did a good deed when no one was looking etc.
I'd also like to point out that Rabbi Akiva was very clear when he said in pirke avos ch.3
"beloved is man for he was created in the image of G-d. It is a greater love that it was made known to him that he was created in the image of G-d, as it is said, 'For in the image of G-d did He make man' (Genesis 9:6)." Rabbi Akiva is very precise with his language. He doesn't say "beloved are the Jews" but rather "beloved is man." There may be other interpretations and metaphorical extrapolations on the verse "in G-d's image He created man" but Rabbi AKiva's is the literal meaning of the verse and the most accepted. Therefore it is the true explanation of it. Furthermore, Adam wasn't a Jew and you can't argue that he wasn't created in the image of G-d. This verse was specifically about him.

[Yochanan Lavie]

In all fairness, I have met Chabadniks who were not racist, and had no problem with black Jews, or non-Jews. I have met both racist and non-racist MO's and chareidim.

There are things in the tanya (and tanach, the Quran, etc.) that are profoundly disturbing. And there are many things that are uplifting. It is up to interpretation. Interpretation (which we excell at as Jews) is an example of religious humanism- a divine-human partnership. The problem is when the interpretators become seen as infallible. We should be far more critical of the tanya, and other works of interpretation (including the talmud itself) than we have been. Human beings bring their prejudices to bear on what they read.

[Eric]

We have countless examples in parshanut (commentary), of different mfarshim (commentators) living in different time periods using the EXACT SAME PASUK to say completely different things. While there are those who use this argument to undermine biblical exegesis and traditional Judaism, I believe this fact allows us Jews to truly "live" by the Torah. It is a living Torah, meaning that in each generation, we interpret and reinterpret our Torah in a way that speaks to us as modern Jews.

Today, racisim has absolutely no place, especially considering that our people has suffered more than any other people. We need to be MORE sensitive to issues of racisim than other people/religions because of our historical experience as a people. When statements are made such as "Chabad is racisit", ironically, this is also a kind of prejudice. Each person must be judged on their own merit, and if there are problems with racisim in certain circles of Chabad or other movements, they should be addressed head on, but not by making generalizations that "Chabad is racist".

[Shmarya]

Shalom writes:
Shmarya, if you read the series "Lessons in Tanya" there is a note at the end of chapter one that reads, "It should be noted that among the nations of the world there are also to be found those whose souls are derived from kelipat nogah. Called “the pious ones of the nations of the world,” these righteous individuals are benevolent not out of selfish motives but out of a genuine concern for their fellow."

Now why is it this amazing discovery of altruistic non-Jews took place ONLY AFTER CHABAD TOOK TREMENDOUS FLACK FROM BTs AND DONORS?

The "series" you quote dates from the 1990s. You have 200 years of silence before that.

[Shmarya]

Also, what the note means is that there are very rare, exceptional non-Jews who are altuistic. This is opposed to Jews who are always presumed to be altruistic.

[kramer]

what about amalek?

[Shalom]

No Shmarya. If you notice, the quote above from Tanyz, "It should be noted that among the nations of the world etc." has a footnote in "Lessons in Tanya" that references "See Siddur Im D'ach, Shaar Chag HaMatzot; Lekutei Biurim (By Rabbi Hillel Malisov of Paritch), 47b." Rabbi Hillel met the Alter Rebbe (author of tanya) and traveled regularly to learn from Rabbi Dovbear and the Tzemach tzeddik. His work, written not too long after the tanya, is the source for the idea of non Jews with klipa noga. So theres no 200 year silence that you speak of.

Furthermore, I feel that many non Jews in the US have shown their altruism through their actions. I would imagine in other areas of the world, kindness in general, and particularly altruism, is not so prevalent (especially in areas where they could care less at the death of Jews or westerners). And regardless, even those who dont have klipa noga, can become very good, righteous people who have a portion in the world to come.

Also, Jews are not always presumed to be altruistic. They merely have the potential to be. Have you heard the idea that you should learn torah shelo lishmah so that you will come to learn it lishmah. This statement already assumes that most who learn torah dont do it completely for its own sake without thought of reward. This same concept applies to all other mitzvot. It takes a lot to truly reach that level. In fact the Alter rebbe goes so far as to say that those who do not learn lishmah in this life will eventually learn lishmah in a future gilgul.

[Shmarya]

You're telling me about Hillel Paritcher? Please. Find ONE REFERENCE FROM A LUBAVITCH REBBE. Can't do that, can you?

Hillel Paritcher was a rebbe in his own right. He was also a posek. If you look in the Shu"t Tzemach Tzedek, you'll occasionally see sha'alot sent to him.

But, again, please show me where ANY LUBAVITCHER REBBE says that non-Jews can be alturistic.

Again, you cannot do that because NO SOURCE EXISTS.

[Shalom]

I think that in general, rebbes spoke about topics relevant to their chassidim. I don't think these rebbes needed to emphasize to their oppressed followers in czarist and communist russia that there were altruistic non Jews. The topic wasn't relevant at the time. They were trying to give their followers the strength to survive as Jews. It would be like trying to tell Jews in a concentration camp in Nazi Germany "don't forget though, there are some good Germans too." Under the conditions it is pointless to emphasize this. Regardless, by the fact that Rabbi Hillel made reference to it, we see that this was a known, undisputed concept among Lubavitchers. And the fact that it was printed in Lessons in Tanya showed that this point was considered very relevant to those living in the US today.

[Shmarya]

Really? The why did Hillel Paritcher do so? Please. Enough apologetics, already.

[Shmarya]

And, by the way, your Holocaust analogy is disgusting – – especially because the Alter Rebbe spied for the Tzar and actively worked to defeat Napoleon.

[Shalom]

If you can attack judaism, the least you can do is not cry "apologetics" whenever someone tries to defend it.

[Shmarya]

You are "defending" Chabad, not Judaism. Process.

[Shalom]

The Czar was the less of two evils. And maybe Chabad isn't Judaism to you, but it is to many.

[me]

sholom, EVEN if it is true. (Which as shmarya pointed out it's not.. it was simply added on later... OH and isn't there a story with the Alter Rebbe who when he was being questioned, they asked him about about that part of tanya??? And that he only smiled "as if to say, you know, good and well it's true") so your saying for the most non-jews are literally incapable of doing any good, for it's on sake? The exact quote, is actually much worse, when you take the full thing in context, it actually says that ALL non-jewish souls are "completelty EVIL, and "have no good to them whatsoever"... those are the exact words... anything less, is of course apologetics.

Yochanan,

If you REALLY believe that chabad is pagan, and has no place in judaism, then why do associate with chabad. EVERY CHABADNIK is racist, if he's not, then he ceases to a chabadnik.

[me]

Moshe,

do want links, I'll give it to you:

http://www.sichosinenglish.org/books/letters-rebbe-1/53.htm

Here you can see how the view was still UPHELD by the last lubavitcher rebbe.

[me]

Thanks Yochanan, 9in regards to your OTHER post)

Moshe, yes it is true that Shahak lied. But doesn't the talmud say "that even the greatest lie has to have SOME TRUTH to it, otherwise it would cease to exist."

In his case, what he said chabad and kabbala and rav kook, was one hundred percent ON THE MONEY.

[me]

and moshe, what about my story, did you ever hear that one. If you wany I can scan the page and upload it for you.

[me]

again, that quote is taken directly from tanya. not paritcher, or whatever his name was.

It's only because, thanks to to Time, Schindler, and others... jews, and chassidim have become somewaht senstized enoyugh to even OFFER apolegetics. As you can the veiw, wasn't so consisinmt throughout lubavitch history.

Esspecialy since, most of it's leaders owe their LIFE to non-jews.

[onionsoupmix]

Shmarya, if you read the series "Lessons in Tanya" there is a note at the end of chapter one that reads, "It should be noted that among the nations of the world there are also to be found those whose souls are derived from kelipat nogah. Called “the pious ones of the nations of the world,” these righteous individuals are benevolent not out of selfish motives but out of a genuine concern for their fellow."

Silly, silly. Chassidei umos haolam only applies to bnei noach, who have taken upon themselves to fulfill the 7 laws ( and all the offshoots) solely because Hashem said so. This is per the rambam- meaning that technically, very few people would qualify nowadays. In addition, you are missing the point -even those nonJews who attain this high level are from "klippas noga" while each and every Jew's nefesh elokis is from kedusha.

More about this here : http://onionsoupmix.livejournal.com/63860.html

[Sam]

The passage quoted from the Tanya regarding non-jews did not originate from the Ba'al HaTanya. He is simply quoting a Eitz Chaim And A gemara.

and Shmarya, I think you should give moshe SOME CREDIT, at least he's sincere enough, and sensitized enough to at least try to explain.

In conclusion, there IS a lot of LIES circling the internet about judaism, these are distortion, and quotes taken out of context. As Gil Student so eloquently points out.

But it be for their own good. If judaism as a whole condemns this kind of "mysticism."

Let them not have an arguement!... thanks.

Sam, can you give me the source?

"so your saying for the most non-jews are literally incapable of doing any good, for it's on sake? The exact quote, is actually much worse, when you take the full thing in context, it actually says that ALL non-jewish souls are "completelty EVIL, and "have no good to them whatsoever"... those are the exact words... anything less, is of course apologetics."

This is TRUE!

Racist ideas formed by racist persons.

Have you ever heard this kind of thinking before ? Aryan? Nazis?, etc..., racism at its finest.

These types of ideas are dispicible, and there apologist disgraceful.

The brainwashing of the sheeple (chabadniks) is nearly complete.

It seems that these are all repressed feeling that are now coming to the fore, which are in fact deep rooted in our past, being continually reiterated during the course of time by the contemporary leaders?

I have always heard fellow jews refer to goys and schvartzes in a derogatory manner, much more so than they towards jews.

Onion soup, I believe the rosh rules contrary to the rambam that shituf is permitted by non jews, though forbidden to Jews. Therefore Christians could be considered bnei noach. If you take this to a further extreme, there are versions of Hinduism which believe in the one G-d Brahman, and that is all they pray to (like paramahansa yogananda). So if you were take this into consideration, and also the idea that formal acceptance of bnei noach couldn't occur except under special cirucumstances (I believe you have to be in the land of Israel) there are a number of potential bnei noach in the world.

Altruism and Religion

"Most, if not all, of the world's religions promote altruism as a very important moral value. Christianity and Buddhism place particular emphasis on altruistic morality,

Judaism, Islam, Hinduism and many other religions also promote altruistic behavior."

I have to poiint out that even those that have the label "completely evil with no good whatsoever" can still become very righteous moral people with a portion in the world to come according to tanya and halacha.

[Shalom]

Shahak is a liar and saying that there was truth in what he had to say is like saying there was truth in what hitler had to say. I don't think shahak was right about rav kook, and please post whatever statements you think are true by Shahhak. He was a liar and an antisemite.

If racism is practice that takes the forms such as prejudice, segregation or subordination.

And, Chabadniks has been documented to state and its followers willfully believe that Non-Jews are inferior and have evil soul;

Then it follows logicaly that Chabadniks are in fact racist, Period!

[Ben Qor'ha (Baldwin)]

The passage quoted from the Tanya regarding non-jews did not originate from the Ba'al HaTanya. He is simply quoting a Eitz Chaim And A gemara.
says Sam

It's true it's taken from Etz Chaim (of R' Chaim be Attar) but chabad codified it in the tanya elevating a daas yochid into an essential article of faith as one can see their approach to qeiruv.
They will approach the lowest of the lows of the jews and tell them how lofty they are even when they don't observe the commandments. That they should always be distinct from the gentiles whose charity is a sin.

Shalom earlier said:
"..."Lessons in Tanya" there is a note at the end of chapter one that reads, "It should be noted that among the nations of the world there are also to be found those whose souls are derived from kelipat nogah. Called “the pious ones of the nations of the world,”
True, the remark that "some" gentile souls are from Nogah is cheap apologetics to fend off antisemites. A true accomplished chabadnik (past the qeiruv stage) does not believe in this "masking" of their iqar article of faith.
From the remark itself, it is evident that the reader is to understand that "some" are an exception to the rule, where gentiles are considered by chabad to be inherently bad as clearly brought out in the Tanya.

When they say:
"these righteous individuals are benevolent not out of selfish motives but out of a genuine concern for their fellow."
It is to allow themselves to raise funds from the gentiles without blushing.
I found it recently nauseatingly funny, when they raised funds for the chanuka break short winter chabad day camp from then incumbant catholic mayor of our town, with a probable promise of support.
One can safely bet they told him nothing about nitel or about avi avot hatum-oh represented by his pope.

Further proof is the fact that this remark chabadniks seem to be stressing is totally absent in the fully annotated bilingual edition of the Tanya used by insiders.
Not one word on the Good Gentile.

Reb Shalom, I hate to disappoint you about Rabbi Aqiva you will find when asking real chabadniks, that "beloved is man" means "beloved is the jew".
שכן כל בר בי רב יודע that others are never described as Adam (man).
אתם נקראים אדם אין הם נקראים אדם
Anything else is mascarading that is divulged to visitors, not insiders.
Reb Yochanan some of them who come across as not racists, are either a very good act, or bad according to the faith they are affiliated with.

[Eric]

In my opinion, this entire machloket boils down to the question of how to interpret "Kedoshim tihiyu" (You shall be holy). The question is, is it a COMMAND to be holy, or a statement, YOU WILL BE HOLY. I believe it's a COMMAND, and therefore, there's nothing inherently holy about Jews just because we're Jews. I believe that the Rambam, Yeshiyahu Leibowitz, Meshech Chochma (Meir Simcha Ha'kohane), perhaps Rabbi Soloveitchik, and many others would agree that Kedoshim tihiyu is a COMMAND and NOT a statement. Yehuda Ha'levi, the Baal Shem Tov, Rav Kook, and many more would argue that it's a statement, meaning, no matter what a Jew does, we are always kedoshim. The danger of this position is that the next logical step could be to say "we're holy and therefore better than non-Jews", and from there, it's a slippery slope that COULD lead one to racisim and prejudice. For a large part of Jewish history, our people has suffered vicious oppression at the hand of Christians or Muslims, so I completely understand how interpreting kedoshim tihiyu as a statement rather than a command would help strengthen sentiment in times of great difficulty. However, I believe that if you put suffering and mysticism aside, it's pretty clear that Kedoshim Tihiyu should be interpreted as a command and not a statement.

It is time for the chabadniks belief system to become exposed for what it is, racism of the highest and most disgraceful form.

[Shalom]

Racism, and all these other words are heavily charged and carry very bad connotations. To call chabadniks racist is foolish. Yes, Jews feel they have greater responsibilities, and according to some kabbalistic sources Jews have certain strengths and connections to G-d which are exclusive to the Jewish people. But I think the most important thing to look at is how the Jewish people treat each other, and the kindness they show to all peoples, regardless of their religion. Racism and elitism are only threatening and dangerous when they leads to murder and control of others, like the Nazis did. In Jewish thought, our gifts are to be used only to help others, not hurt them. It is completely different than the power trip other people get when claiming to be the superior race, who have a right to dominate and rule others. Torah is about using our power and strengths only for the good of all mankind. That is all that really, truly matters in this debate.

[Ben Qor'ha (Baldwin)]

Reb Shalom,
yes true, very bad connotations should be there where due.
the racist should be exposed as such and cannot keep dancing like the hypocrites that they really are.
it is not foolish to call chabadniks racists. it may be inconvenient for them to live with the truth that they willfully flount and are very well aware off.
the qabbalistic sources you may be refering to, are poor quality peptalkers. intellectually dihonest trash purveyors.
funny how you said most important thing is how jews treat each other, then you corrected yourself, and everybody else.
I know the lines oh you should be very carefull with your fellow jews. When the others drown however, let them sink. Klippos. no?
Sitro achoro.
As to uberman not killing anybody else, not true we are starting to ignore other peoples suffering.

[Shalom]

I didn't correct myself, i was emphasizing both Jews and non Jews. And just because some jewish people don't live according to the torah all the time, and don't treat other people (both Jews and non Jews) with respect, doesn't mean that the actual halacha and its ethical teachings are in any way at fault. We are not debating those who misapply the torah's teachings, we are debating the teachings themselves.

And for all those who talk so badly about chabad, I recommend watching the following video.

http://www.chabad.org/multimedia/archives.asp?AID=42106&StartList=61

scroll down to program 62 and click on the " Maimonides – A Light Unto the Nations" link.

[me]

Ben Qor'ho, I couldn't of said it better myself.

The facts are Lubavitch, by it's very nature racist.

If tomorrow, they were to find out then one of their congregants is really not jewish, they would say "f-ck him!"
and their so called "love" for the man would cease to exist. It's extremly conditional. They love people not because of the what they've done, believe or whatever. But simply because there jewish.

It's interesting, that in the beginning chabad was supposed to be reclusive cult. It was only when the last lubavitch rebbe, decided to "spread" his teachings, they were left with a conundrum, and it was only THEN that the less exclusivist aspect of the doctrine reasserted itself. If they were going to "universal appeal," they can't say that all non-jews, are the scum of the earth.

However, just like Ben Qor'ha point out, every chabadnik, and every student of jewish mysticism, believes that, in his heart.

Sholom, PLEASE your not giving the quote justice, it does not say, that jews by their effort and by their CHOOSING to, have a special connection to God. Not so. what it says is, that jews, simply by the fact that they ARE jews ARE inherently good. where as Non-Jews are INHERENTLY EVIL! I mean come on... it's SPELLED OUT! anything less, is a modern, watered down, diluted version of chabad.

eric, and Ben Qur'ho, I also find it funny that chabad has such "universal appeal", for example "matisyahu" "the chabad telethon" "chabd being mentioned on the simpssons." All these people take advantage of the ignorants of the people. But don't worry, thanks to people like Shmarya, the walls of this cult will soon come down. I swear.

What I'm curious about now is, those other sources sam was talking about. I sure hope this is not part of the mesora.

As for Israel Shahak, whether he did intentionally or not, he DID lie. But just like that talmudic quote goes: "even the greatest lie has to have some truth to it, otherwise it would cease to exist." The worst kind of propaganda, has to have some truth to it, no matter how small, otherwise it would cease to exist.

Shahak, as it is clear from Gil Student's writing lied about the talmud, and the halacha, but he DID NOT lie about, those "kabbalistic sources."

Sholom, did you hear some of the speeches some of those rabbis made at Goldstein funeral? about a thousand non-jews not being as worthy a jewish fingernail... and such... all this, all this, is a consequence of that kabbalistic philosophy.

[me]

Ben Qor'ho, I couldn't of said it better myself.

The facts are Lubavitch, is by it's very nature racist.

If tomorrow, they were to find out then one of their congregants is really not jewish, they would say "f-ck him!"
and their so called "love" for the man would cease to exist. It's extremly conditional. They love people not because of the what they've done, believe or whatever. But simply because there jewish.

It's interesting, that in the beginning chabad was supposed to be reclusive cult. It was only when the last lubavitch rebbe, decided to "spread" his teachings, they were left with a conundrum, and it was only THEN that the less exclusivist aspect of the doctrine reasserted itself. If they were going to "universal appeal," they can't say that all non-jews, are the scum of the earth.

However, just like Ben Qor'ha point out, every chabadnik, and every student of jewish mysticism, believes that, in his heart.

Sholom, PLEASE your not giving the quote justice, it does not say, that jews by their effort and by their CHOOSING to, have a special connection to God. Not so. what it says is, that jews, simply by the fact that they ARE jews ARE inherently good. where as Non-Jews are INHERENTLY EVIL! I mean come on... it's SPELLED OUT! anything less, is a modern, watered down, diluted version of chabad.

eric, and Ben Qur'ho, I also find it funny that chabad has such "universal appeal", for example "matisyahu" "the chabad telethon" chabad being mentioned on the simpsons. All these people take advantage of the ignorants of the people they hate so much. But don't worry, thanks to people like Shmarya, the walls of this cult will soon come down. I swear.

What I'm curious about now is, those other sources sam was talking about. I sure hope this is not part of the mesora.

As for Israel Shahak, whether he did intentionally or not, he DID lie. But just like that talmudic quote goes: "even the greatest lie has to have some truth to it, otherwise it would cease to exist." The worst kind of propaganda, has to have some truth to it, no matter how small, otherwise it would cease to exist.

Shahak, as it is clear from Gil Student's writing lied about the talmud, and the halacha, but he DID NOT lie about, those "kabbalistic sources."

Sholom, did you hear some of the speeches some of those rabbis made at Goldstein funeral? about a thousand non-jews not being as worthy a jewish fingernail... and such... all this, all this, is a consequence of that kabbalistic philosophy.

[me]

it's funny th rebbe never refers to non-jews as "neet-yiden" (yiddish for non-jews) but allways calls them goyim. Only in THAT video does he call thewm "neet-yeeden" Perhaps their was news reporters there. Moreover, why does he keep stressing "EEEEVEN... non-jews" ("afilu neet-yeeden") what's the big EVEN.

why should that suprise anybody?

Anyhow, let just cyut to the chase. Sholom, you might identify yourself as a chabadnik, but you not really a chabadnik.

You belong to the "hangers-on", the one's that are somewhat horrified by it's beleifs, but try to come up with explanations.

Tha fact is, Chabad is the jewish equivelent of the Taliban. Yes, chabad does to tremondeous amounts of charity (for jews only) but so does the tasliban. This kind of defense "but look at all the good chabad does" holds no water. the FACT IS, they created the biggest split among jews. And they are hatefully, and rabidly RACIST.

i just hope that the rest of judaism, is not like this.

Moshe, what about that story about the alter rebbe, the FOUNDER of chabad, you still haven't replied to that.

What about that link I sent you, (where one can see the TRUE beleifs of the last lubavitcher rebbe), you still haven't replied to that either.

by the way, disagrees with miamonides regarding a world to come?

[Shalom]

"Tha fact is, Chabad is the jewish equivelent of the Taliban. Yes, chabad does to tremondeous amounts of charity (for jews only) but so does the tasliban. This kind of defense "but look at all the good chabad does" holds no water. the FACT IS, they created the biggest split among jews. And they are hatefully, and rabidly RACIST."

I dont hear chabadniks talking this way. It is only ashkenazim and misnagdim that are so rabidly hateful of Chabad, and thats what creates this split. This hatred of Chabad is based on a lack of knowledge, and anyone who compares Chabad to nazis or taliban is sorely in need of a reality check. If you ever are in need, you always know that your local chabad will help you out no matter what kind of a jew you are and no matter how rich or poor you are.

BTW the rebbe was known for specifially avoiding the word "goyim" and most of the time, if not always referred to non Jews as "neet yiddin."

[Eric]

I want to make it clear that I'm opposed to the agenda of this blog, which as far as I can tell, is to trash Chabad in any way possible. Based on my experience coming from a secular background, becoming observant through Chabad and not very much part of the Modern Orthodox community, in many ways totally opposed to the Chabad hashkafa in terms of tzadik, kabala, superiority complext, etc... but all in all, I wouldn't be where I am if it weren't for Chabad. And when I travel, it's always Chabad and only Chabad that can counted on for a place to stay when I'm in a pinch (landing somewhere in Europe Friday afternoon a few hours before Shabbat). If I had to say what Chabad philosophy is in the bigger picture, I would have to say it's to help teach other Jews to be proud of their Jewish heritage and to live live's as proud Jews. It's only when you get into the details of how to do that according to Chabad that I would have serious disagreements. Please think about Chabad houses on college campuses, read the book "The Rebbe's Army". For the most part, Chabad is teaching the basics of Judaism ie) Shabbat, Kashruth, davening, etc. The details very rarely come up. Although I am much more in line with the philosophy of Bnei Akiba, YU, Modern Orthodox, they aren't doing it nearly as well as Chabad is. I don't really care that Chabad may be doing it to take over the world, or spread their hashkafa, etc.. the bottom line is, they're doing work that desperately needs to be done that no one else is doing as well as they are, so I have to give this aspect of Chabad my support. All in all, I have to say that I love Chabad, but I have serious objections to many aspects of Chabad hashkafa, but I won't allow this to lessen my love and respect for Chabad.

[me]

Very well, i understand you eric, all we disagree on is terminology, chabad people do marvelous things... okay, so what?... so we should say that "Chabad people do marvelous things for people (so long as your jewsh), however chabad does have some very, very, disturbing beliefs about non-jews.

how do you like that.

These are not mere details Eric, this clearly SPELLED OUT.

However it will be a disservice TO EVERYBODY (especially jews) if these beliefs (not the people) are not CALLED OUT!

Sholom, let's see, what did he call them here:

http://www.sichosinenglish.org/books/letters-rebbe-1/53.htm

Okay so basically Sholom, you disagree with the Tanya right?

How were the beliefs and actions of Baruch Goldstein any different then that of a nazi, or a Muslim extremist?

Can you tell me.

Sholom, I love you man. But GET REAL. Thank you.

Its so strange to read that no matter how racist and immoral chabads platform of beliefs are, you will still love them, silly, to the least.

If you have to thank chabad where you are today, that is a sad, for now you belong in a racist cult - try and get out of this and maintain their respect, these people that ypu believe love you unconditionly will turn against you as you were the plague.

These people practice racism -racism in any form is immoral, stop deluding yourselves with shameful apologies.

[Ben Qor'ha (Baldwin)]

Shalom
I saw the video and I must say, that it was a watershed in regards to my opinion of the Rebbe Mame'sh, yet I can't help thinking that such sicho, must have been a watershed to most of his listeners. Having spent years before and after the Rebbe Mame'sh's death close to chabad, I would say such talk as presented in the sicha doesnot seem to have seeped thru to reach any chabadnik.
In fact I know for a fact Chabad discourages (indeed prohibits) the reading of the Guide of the Perplexed reffered to by the Mamesh Rebbe in his talk.
What is one to make out of that?

[Eric]

No one can deny that Tanya has very disturbing writings on non-Jews if we take it at face value, 2007 America. However, consider the context in which Tanya was written. Pogrom ridden eastern Europe, thousands of innocent Jews being killed by Kozaks or Christian Jew haters. This resulted in an extremely insular, shtetel kind of society that we cannot begin to understand from our liberal modern American perspective. So I put the question on the table, is it really fair to judge all of Chabad based on a text written under very different social conditions that we cannot really relate to? The question then becomes, to what extent do Chabadniks take Tanya at face value, or are they able to interpret, perhaps by using apologetics, and arrive at a very different conclusion than waht Tanya says at face value? It seems to me that the only reason we're able to live according to the Torah is because much like the US constitution, we're able to interpret and reinterpret and flip it on its' head in order to be able to say "we live our lives according to the Torah, but if you only read the Torah and take everyting at face value, you won't have a clue how we live today". This is because you have to be able to flip it on its head in order to make it a "living Torah". The title of this blog was "Shvartze", and it actually shows that Shmuel Boteach who is certainly "Chabad" in the sense that he's a follower of the late Lubavitcher Rebbe and I assume he teaches Tanya, but somehow, he's able to reach a very different conclusion than other Chabadniks who may take Tanya at face value. So perhaps the problem is not the original text (Tanya) which is revered, but the lack of interpretation on the part of some. Any text, if not taken in its proper historical context, could have the same problem.

[Shmarya]

1. !790s Belarus was not pogom ridden.

2. Chabad takes the Tanya literally. It is not just as "text;" it is the foundational work of Chabad hasidut.

The main attribute that Judaism is respected for is its idea of the virtues of morality, by what is written here by some seems it has all been just a fraud.

That we are no better than the Nazi's and Muslim extremist-this will not do, it is not acceptable.

My appreciation here to all those that stand up with integraty and in an intelligent manner to state that they will not willfully accept that this be done in the name of Judaism.

[Shalom]

Shmarya, massacres of Jews were common during that period. The Khmelnytsky massacre occurred between 1648-1654. In 1768 the Massacre of Uman occurred in Poland where thousands of jews were killed. The first official Russian pogrom is said to have occurred in 1821 in which a number of Jews were killed while others claim is was a separate riot in 1859 that was the first official pogrom. Bottom line is this kind of thing was happening all over around the time of the Tanya completion and publication.

[me]

Eric, I agree with you.

But can you tell me a how do I put positive spin on, "all non-jewish souls are ENTIRELY evil, and contain no good to them whatsoever [sic]"

[Shmarya]

Not in Bealrus. Not at the time of the Ba'al HaTanya. Chemelnitzki was 150 years before the Tanya. Uman is nowhere near Belarus. 1821 is fter the Ba'al HaTanya died.

You're simply incorrect.

[me]

Eric, I agree with you.

But can you tell me a how do I put positive spin on, "all non-jewish souls are ENTIRELY evil, and contain no good to them whatsoever [sic]"

[me]

Boteach might of indeed come to different conclusions (assuming that he's not lying), but it was only because he deviated from the original source. An analog can be made to the moderate muslim. The people with wacky extremist veiws, do not extremist veiws at all, only they are the one's that truely adhere to the true text. The so called "moderates" and "modern-muslims", have litteraly deviated from the original text.

[Ben Qor'ha (Baldwin)]

R' Shalom
says,
".....Jews were common during that period. The Khmelnytsky massacre occurred between 1648-1654. In 1768 the Massacre of Uman occurred in Poland where thousands of jews were killed. ......in 1821 in which a number of Jews ....in 1859 that was the first official pogrom. Bottom line ...."

There is no bottom line nothing, you are not reading what you are being told. Nay, it seems that you are not even aware of what you are writing.
What bottom line?
What are all these dates proving, when chabadniks express themselves in a racist way in modern days America.
You are told 1790 there were no pogroms and you throw all these dates from preceding and succeeding centuries.
When the R' Mamesh dismisses the help to Ethiopian Jews as unecessary!
When Shmarya tells you that Chabadniks take the Tanya literally, it's true!
Their religion is not Judaism, it fetishist Tanya . Their love for every fellow Jew, is fetishist. They have no love. They are commanded to love, they say to themselves we love every fellow jew in a mechanical fetishist way. They do not know what is love.
The emperor is naked, and the whole world is watching.
If you are an honest good man, escape while you can from both this argument and from this gang.

[Ben Qor'ha (Baldwin)]

Eric says:
"The title of this blog was "Shvartze", and it actually shows that Shmuel Boteach who is certainly "Chabad" in the sense that he's a follower of the late Lubavitcher Rebbe and I assume he teaches Tanya, but somehow, he's able to reach a very different conclusion than other Chabadniks who may take Tanya at face value."

If Shmueli Boteach is a Chabadnik, he would then be a lone tzaddik in Sdom.
Fortunately for him, while it is true that he was raised within Chabad, he outgrew them and reached a span of education that far exceeds what they provide. He was rejected already by Chabad during the lifetime of R' Mame'sh.
And what a lucky thing it is for him.
He is a genuine intelligent and honest speaker not a deceiptful phoney from the dark ages posing as modern.

[me]

never the less, I must say, that I have a greatr love for both you and sholom, you certainly mean well. I did grow up amongst lubavitchers, for the greater part of my life, ands refreshing to see, that not everybody is a monster. it's refreshing to see that people are at least somewhat sensitive enough, and human enough, to at least offer apologetics.

[Yos]

I've been having this argument for the last week or so. It's funny coming here and seeing the same stuff come up. Fine evidence that the issue can't be reconciled.

Bottom line (to me)? Tanya? What Tanya? Read the Chumash! Forget mysticism, God literally says the best a goy can be is a servant. The Jewish equivalent of a Dhimmi. Worse, maybe.

For whatever crazy reason, I hold on to faith, but there's no getting away from the unambiguous, demonstratably false, and outright primal morality of the Torah. The self-aggrandizement of the Torah can be found in all traditions.

We're better than them. We're different from them. A retarded child could see the flaw in this logic.

That said, I see no precedent for racism against blacks (in particular).

[me]

thanks, Ben Q'orha. Indeed Boteach is seen as deviant amongst most poeple with true Lubavitch veiws.

[me,]

Yos,

I hope to G-d (if He exists) that your not right.

[Shalom]

Everything said, I'd like to again reiterate that compared to other religions that condemn you to eternal hell for not believing the tenants of their faith, the Tanya's description of non Jewish souls can hardly be called racist. If that is racist, then how much more so must you also say that every Christian and Moslem (as well as any other member of a religion that has similar beliefs) is racist because they claim only those who follow there religion are guaranteed a spot in heaven. If we can accept that, why is it so hard to accept that Jews feel they are better because they follow the right religion. Most people in the world think they are better than others because only they have the correct philosophy and only they are living life correctly. Whatever the parameters of such a belief, its not a problem until it has visibly harmful effects on others.

[Shalom]

"They have no love. They are commanded to love, they say to themselves we love every fellow jew in a mechanical fetishist way. They do not know what is love."

Providing every jew with assistance when they truly are in need and alone, rich or poor, is what I would define as true love.

[Shmarya]

Judaism says just that. Only Bnai Noach (maybe) get a spot in heaven. All the other non-Jews just fadse away. So we're racist, using your new formula.

Ben Qor'ha (Baldwin)

Great summation! However i believe it would be a shame for the outsiders to become aware of these aspects of judaism, for it will not only cause hatred, but more disturbing it will cause people to loose respect and admiration for it, and for what many believed was the jewish high regard for human and civil rights, also for not being stigmatized with racist behaviour / beliefs, this would be a great set bsck for judaism.

"Providing every jew with assistance when they truly are in need and alone, rich or poor, is what I would define as true love."

No that is accommodation not true love.

A catholic person (or most any person in fact) can go for assistance in any city in the world where there is a catholic church and be welcomed, this is not love, rather it is accomodation - there is no love for the the

This is love;

A deep, tender, ineffable feeling of affection and solicitude toward a person, such as that arising from kinship, recognition of attractive qualities, or a sense of underlying oneness.
A feeling of intense desire and attraction toward a person with whom one is disposed to make a pair;

[me]

I reiterate, the tanya, and some other jewish mystism is of the opinion that:

Jews are superior to non-jews, not because of belief, practice, or ethics. But simply by their very being jewish.

Supposed non-jews who convert to judaism, are really jews.

Non jews on the other are of entirely "diffrent nature"... and are as lowly as the lowest of creatures.

There is no choice. It's just a pre-determened dispositon.

This, is the exact definition of racism.

Where as rational, judaism, and other religions, give the person a CHOICE to be "just as good as the other person"... the tanya, does no such thing.

[Eric]

Putting Chabad aside, we have practices in main stream Judaism that may be considered to be just as racisit or politically incorrect. We don't use the processed grapes of non-Jews. If a non-Jew turns on the fire to boil an egg, the pot has to be rekashered (or toiveled in the mikveh). We don't exactly put these on a banner and wave them around because it doesn't make much sense. You people who are screaming that Chabad should be exposed for what it is are being unreasonable. First of all, it's not exactly a secret what the Tanya says, anyone who wants to find these verses can find them in their native language and ask anyone within Chabad how they interpret them. In this way, they can see for themselves what Chabad is, and accept it or not accept it. I obviously don't accept it, but they have the right to teach whatever they want to teach (it's a free country!). Secondly, it's not realistic if you expect Chabad to put these verses from Tanya on a banner and fly them around in everyone's face. It's poor marketing, and no one else does this. I think the non politically correct sources in Tanya are treated similarly by Chabadniks who hold the text to be sacred. In the 4 years that I was involved with Chabad in the college days, I never heard these quotes, and I was pretty heavily involved in the campus Chabad house, although I'll admit that I did not learn Tanya on a regular basis. The fact that these non politically correct texts exist does not bother me so much, just as long as racisim does not penetrate the people who adhere to these texts. From my experience, it's really a mixed bag. I've met racist Chabadniks, but I've also met racisit Litvaks and modern Orthodox and Conservative and Reform and Secular Jews. When I confront racisim, I prefer to confront it for what it is rather than spilling out the baby with the bath water. The other issue that I would put on the table is the fact that a high percentage of Chabadniks are Baalay Tshuva, and it seems to me that they come to Chabad often for social reasons (having an identiy that provides a strong sense of community, perhaps a job as a shaliach, etc) and not so much for the ideological reasons behind Chabad ideology. As a matter of fact, many of the people who become Chabad are probably unaware of all of the details of the ideology. I question whether there is a clear, unified, Chabad ideology today, especailly given the division of Mashichist/non-Mashichist camps.

[Shmarya]

We don't use the wine and grape juice of non-Jews because of its (former) association with idol worship. We don't eat cooked food (even cooked kosher food) on non-Jews in order to prevent intermarriage.

In the first case, before the gezera was made, we did use non-Jewish made wine. In the second, we did eat non-Jewish cooked (kosher) food. Neither gezera says anything about a non-Jew's inherent status or lack of same.

The Tanya posits that non-Jewish souls are different. They are lower, coarser and from evil.

If you cannot see the difference between these cases, I think you are beyond help.

[me]

again this sort of "love" is only to find blessedness in the eyes of the last lubavitch rebbe. It is an extreme CONDITIONAL sort of love.

to illustrate:

If a chabad parent were to find out that there was a mix up in the hospital, and his son who he has come to "love" in the past eighteen years is really not jewish... then he would immediately throw him to the dogs.

Simirlarly,

If a "shliach" were to find out that a congregant of his, who has been dying from cancer in the hospital, who has come to "care for".. he had .. is really a non-jew.. he would say "f-ck-him"

The only reason why I'm agnostic, is because I don't think Aish would do that.

[Shalom]

Shmarya, just the fact you can't intermarry could be called racist. Regardless, the Tanya does not say that Jews are superior to non jews. It actually is teaching that Jews have a greater potential to become good and a greater potential to become evil. And it also teaches that non jews can become wonderful moral people, regardless of where their soul stems from. Thats all that matters. They can become wonderful moral people, and holy before G-d with a share in the world to come. This is what is important.

And when it comes to love, love is shown through actions, not just "feelings" " Chabad will get a person a place to stay and a meal at the rabbi's table, even when they are dreadlocked, broke, drugged out hippies. Thats more than just accomodation. Furthermore, they will do everything they can to help them move forward and get their life together, to achieve their potential. They actually try to help people on a close personal level. Thats true caring for an individual, and not to be brushed off as simply "accomodation."

[me]

"The fact that these non politically correct texts exist does not bother me so much, just as long as racisim does not penetrate the people who adhere to these texts."

Oh but they have!

[Shalom]

Me, I don't think chabad would reject someone like that. I've seen chabadniks especially shluchim be especially kind to those who are just thinking about converting,. So someone who had lived their life as though they were a Jew, even if they weren't, would most definitely be treated with the same kindness as they had always been treated with.

[Shmarya]

Shalom –

1. A ban on intermarriage is not racist. A ban on intermarriage because a person's soul comes from the root of evil, or his skin color is black, etc. is racist.

2. Nice spin on the Tanya. It's not true, however, as anyone with a real background in hasidut would know.

Shmarya, once again, nicely stated.

Either you can accept that it is racst (when we consider others as sub-human) in nature , and that it is the foundation of chabad theology, or you are deluding youself.

How shameful that there are those that want to defend this belief.

[Eric]

Shmarya, I do see the difference, but the point that I'm making is that you first have to take into account the historical background of the time period when these texts were compiled. If we were living in 18th century eastern Europe, I think that we would hate all non-Jews as well, because living in insular communities, our only interaction with non-Jews would be within an anti-Semitic context. I agree that these texts do not speak to Jews living in modern day America and I find them repulsive. But if you look at how various Middle Aged Halachic codifiers viewed the status of women, you would also find that repulsive. We have to take the historical background into account, but as part of the Mesorah, the previous generations are seen as being closer to Har Sinai and therefore having a higher level of kedusha if you will, so it's not easy to just push it aside. Therefore, you're left with apologetics which means to me "well, we can't accept what's written in the text, so we have to find a creative way to flip it on its head to come up with a different interpretation and in the end, preserve the sanctity of the text." If I were allowed to teach in a Chabad school (which I don't think would ever happen), and I was told I had to teach Tanya, I would present the text for what it is, then I would present its historical context, then I would put the question on the table, "how does this text speak to us today given what we believe our mission to be, etc". I would present the conflict between the values that we hold (ie. not being racisit), and the values of the text, and I would perhaps ask about what prejudices we may have today. In 300 years from now, how will our children look back on us? For me, this is what text study means, but I refuse to avoid the text just because the messages in them are repulsive to me. I realize that this is very theoretical, but it shows what I believe to be the importance of parshanut.

[Shmarya]

Eric writes:

"…the point that I'm making is that you first have to take into account the historical background of the time period when these texts were compiled. If we were living in 18th century eastern Europe, I think that we would hate all non-Jews as well, because living in insular communities, our only interaction with non-Jews would be within an anti-Semitic context."

This is absoultely false. There was much contact between Jes and non-Jews, most of it good.

[me]

Eric, in regards to the latter part of your comment I agree one hundred percent.

In my bitterness, I sometimes I tend to classify anyone who identifies him or herself as a lubavitcher, as a racist, even though the truth is they might, like you say, be totally ignorant of the facts.

However the litvaks, reformed and conservative, and secular racist jews you've come across, have deviated from their philosophies. In other wards, they're hypocrites. Not so for the lubavitcher, the hasid, or any jew who these mysticism has seeped in to their psyche.

"And it also teaches that non jews can become wonderful moral people, regardless of where their soul stems from. "

The non jews can become moral but the jew is moral just for being jewish - that is racism, and your promoting of such, i am sorry but makes you a racist.

Helping people out when they are down is not love it is an accommodation, period.

Stop deluding yourself, it is shameful to believe that some humans are not only better than other hu ans but their actual souls are worthless just for who they are, this is immoral - if there is a god are greatly offending him.

All the apologist wanting to defend the primitive thinking of these uneducated leaders, should take time and thoughtfully consider these how disturbing this kind of sick mentallity really is.

[Eric]

In almost every single case, with very few exceptions, every nationality/race/religion has historically thought itself to be in some way superior to others. Judaism is no exception, and to a greater extent I guess Chabad is also no exception. I'm not defending the belief, as I've stated on numerous occasions I find it to be offensive, but it is dishonest not keep this in mind when debating the issue.

The open secret in chabad leadership is not the love for their fellow tribesman, but rather the desire to incease the flok (turned into sheeples) in order to elevate their own personal value both in the community and in the outside world, and finally for gaining Gods devine attention for his supposed moral actions and contributions.

This is false altruism as it done for the belief in an ultimate reward .

[Shalom]

"Nice spin on the Tanya. It's not true, however, as anyone with a real background in hasidut would know."

Its not a spin, what I wrote is the truth.

"but the jew is moral just for being jewish - that is racism, and your promoting of such, i am sorry but makes you a racist."

Nowhere does it say this. Bugsy Segal wasn't moral. Jews have the potential to become very righteous or very wicked. As do non Jews. You don't want to look at the facts. You want so badly to be able to label Chabad racist, it would promote your own racism against Chabad so well. Look at the truth. Look at everything said. The facts are:
1. both jews and non jews can be righteous or wicked.
2. Both jews and non jews can earn a share in the world to come.
3. Regardless of a person's religion, halacha and the teachings of chassidus require kindness and compassion towards everyone.
4. Jewish views of having a greater potential for G-dliness is a concept that is meant to make one a better more kind person towards everyone else.
5. Every religion says they are better than others because they have a special connection with G-d, that others who are not of their faith do not have. Yet we don't label Christians, Moslems, Hindus, Buddhists, and every other religion as racist. So we shouldn't do so against Chabad either.
6. Just because there are individuals who are racists in the Jewish religion does not mean that you can label the Jewish religion or all Jews as racist.

[Shmarya]

You're wrong. You're just too ignorant to know it.

1. There is an argument in halakha about whether non-Jews – even Bnai Noach – have a place in the world to come. Did you know that? Did you know that in the 1980s, when Chabad began pushing Bnai Noach (to prevent another Holocaust, the Rebbe said) Chabad held that Bnai Noach got all their reward here and had no place in Olam HaBa? Of course you didn't know any of this.

2. Your #3 is absolutely false.

3. So is your #4.

4. Following the correct teachings and thinking others do not is not racist. Thinking others have SOULS THAT COME FROM THE ROOT OF EVIL OR ARE NO DIFFERENT THAN THE SOUL OF A COW IS RACIST. Process that.

[me]

Eric,

You have to understand that the Tanya is considered to be just as sacred bible, to those who adhere to true lubavitch ideas.

[me]

"You want so badly to be able to label Chabad racist, it would promote your own racism against Chabad so well."

chabad is not a people/race/nationality, it's an ideology.

as for the rest of your blog, OH MY GOD...

AGAIN,

"

I reiterate, the tanya, and some other jewish mystism is of the opinion that:

Jews are superior to non-jews, not because of belief, practice, or ethics. But simply by their very being jewish.

Supposed non-jews who convert to judaism, are really jews.

Non jews on the other are of entirely "diffrent nature"... and are as lowly as the lowest of creatures.

There is no choice. It's just a pre-determened dispositon.

This, is the exact definition of racism.

Where as rational judaism, and other religions, give the person a CHOICE to be "just as good as the other person"... the tanya, does no such thing."

[me]

"Me, I don't think chabad would reject someone like that. I've seen chabadniks especially shluchim be especially kind to those who are just thinking about converting,. So someone who had lived their life as though they were a Jew, even if they weren't, would most definitely be treated with the same kindness as they had always been treated with."

I do think so, cuz I KNOW SO.

[me]

My comments are in italics.

1. both jews and non jews can be righteous or wicked.

"the worst jew, does not come CLOSE to the most righteus gentile"
--some kabbalistic moqor, you tell me

"...however gentile souls are of an entirely different nature. "they are derived from the three klipot, they are entirely EVIL and have NO GOOD to them, whatsoever."

2. Both jews and non jews can earn a share in the world to come.

well... according to the video you posted, that's not true.

3. Regardless of a person's religion, halacha and the teachings of chassidus require kindness and compassion towards everyone.

OH NO IT DOES NOT!... chassidus, doesn't even exept other forms of judaism!

4. Jewish views of having a greater potential for G-dliness is a concept that is meant to make one a better more kind person towards everyone else.

no... it doesn't... it has the EXACT OPPOSITE effect"

5. Every religion says they are better than others because they have a special connection with G-d, that others who are not of their faith do not have. Yet we don't label Christians, Moslems, Hindus, Buddhists, and every other religion as racist. So we shouldn't do so against Chabad either.

That's not true, EVERY religion, including rational judaism says that a person can find blessednes and be "JUST AS GOOD AS THE NEXT GUY" so long as he adheres to it's tenets!

6. Just because there are individuals who are racists in the Jewish religion does not mean that you can label the Jewish religion or all Jews as racist.

did you hear me or Shmarya or anyone here call all jews racist? We were very specific.

[me]

My comments are in italics.

1. both jews and non jews can be righteous or wicked.

"the worst jew, does not come CLOSE to the most righteus gentile"
--some kabbalistic moqor, you tell me

"...however gentile souls are of an entirely different nature. "they are derived from the three klipot, they are entirely EVIL and have NO GOOD to them, whatsoever."
--the tanya

2. Both jews and non jews can earn a share in the world to come.

well, according to the video you posted, that's not true.

3.Regardless of a person's religion, halacha and the teachings of chassidus require kindness and compassion towards everyone.

OH NO IT DOES NOT!... chassidus, doesn't even exept other forms of judaism!

4. Jewish views of having a greater potential for G-dliness is a concept that is meant to make one a better more kind person towards everyone else.

no... it doesn't... it has the EXACT OPPOSITE effect"

5. Every religion says they are better than others because they have a special connection with G-d, that others who are not of their faith do not have. Yet we don't label Christians, Moslems, Hindus, Buddhists, and every other religion as racist. So we shouldn't do so against Chabad either.

That's not true, EVERY religion, including rational judaism says that a person can find blessednes and be "JUST AS GOOD AS THE NEXT GUY" so long as he adheres to it's tenets!

6. Just because there are individuals who are racists in the Jewish religion does not mean that you can label the Jewish religion or all Jews as racist.

did you hear me or Shmarya, call all jews racist? No, we were very specific.

[me]

NOTE TO SHMARYA: Please delete the first one, and delete the second. I messed up, and someone might confused.

[me]

My comments are in italics.

1. both jews and non jews can be righteous or wicked.

"the worst jew, does not come CLOSE to the most righteus gentile"
--some kabbalistic moqor, you tell me

"...however gentile souls are of an entirely different nature. "they are derived from the three klipot, they are entirely EVIL and have NO GOOD to them, whatsoever."

2. Both jews and non jews can earn a share in the world to come.

well... according to the video you posted, that's not true.

3. Regardless of a person's religion, halacha and the teachings of chassidus require kindness and compassion towards everyone.

OH NO IT DOES NOT!... chassidus, doesn't even exept other forms of judaism!

4. Jewish views of having a greater potential for G-dliness is a concept that is meant to make one a better more kind person towards everyone else.

no... it doesn't... it has the EXACT OPPOSITE effect"

5. Every religion says they are better than others because they have a special connection with G-d, that others who are not of their faith do not have. Yet we don't label Christians, Moslems, Hindus, Buddhists, and every other religion as racist. So we shouldn't do so against Chabad either.

That's not true, EVERY religion, including rational judaism says that a person can find blessednes and be "JUST AS GOOD AS THE NEXT GUY" so long as he adheres to it's tenets!

6.Just because there are individuals who are racists in the Jewish religion does not mean that you can label the Jewish religion or all Jews as racist.

did you hear me or Shmarya or anyone here call all jews racist? No,We were very specific.

[me]

Shmarya, post that one. thank you.

[me]

oh sh-t! what happened?

[ed]

Kol YISROEL Yesh Lahem Chelek L'olam Haboh. Is that racist too?

[me]

Ed,

where is that from?

[Shmarya]

Don't be a moron, ed. All Jews have a place in the world to come is a mishna. It's no more racist than Christians saying all who believe are saved – unless Judasim limits olam haba to Jews only, or to very special non-Jews and all Jews. Then it would be bigoted.

It is what we added to that mishna that is racist and bigoted.

[Shmarya]

To be clear –

Saying non-Jews have no place in the world to come, or that only a handful of the most special non-Jews have a place, is what is bigoted.

Shmarya, when and where did the Lubavitcher rebbe say "Chabad held that Bnai Noach got all their reward here and had no place in Olam HaBa? "

[Shalom]

"Saying non-Jews have no place in the world to come, or that only a handful of the most special non-Jews have a place, is what is bigoted."

Saying that non Christians have no place in the world to come, or that only a handful of the most special non-christians have a place, is what is bigoted.

Process that.

[Shmarya]

I did not say the Rebbe said it; I said Chabad held it. How do I know? A Chabad friend wrote a book about Bnai Noach. He told me the rabbonim he asked all held no olam haba.

[Shmarya]

Shalom –

No, you still don't get it. Christians don't say non-Christian souls are from evil or that were a genetically unable to get to heaven. They say accept J and you're saved.

Judaism says either convert – and that is made difficult – or no olam haba. Worse than that, we say (according to the Tanya) that non-Jewish souls are from an evil source.

Again, all Christians say is that there is one path to heaven. Anyone can take that path. We do not say the same.

[Shalom]

Saying that those who were lucky enough to hear a special message, ie that chtistianity is true, or that islam is true, and everyone else who didnt hear about it, or who didnt know enough about it is destined to hell and is not special and loved by G-d, is no different than what we are discussing here.

Who is this friend and what book?

[Shmarya]

Path of the Ritgheous Gentile.