The Rebbe's Legacy, 13 Years On

The OU's Executive Vice President Rabbi Tzvi Hersh Weinreb writes:

…In the absence of a leader, there has been a messianic reaction. Based on fragmentary remarks by the Rebbe himself, many of his followers believe that he is the Messiah, and that he will return from the dead to once again lead his followers, and not only his followers, but all the world, into the Messianic era. The belief is certainly not mainstream Judaism, and in the eyes of many is a blasphemy to Judaism no different from the messianic beliefs of Christianity. That the Rebbe's great piety, scholarship, and love of Israel should be sullied by such an unacceptable heresy is a grievous tragedy.…

Comments

[edd]

Lawrence M. Reisman
I do want to give you credit for not giving insults every few second like the scholar you just mention, shows maybe your learning the good things and not the bad.

[edd]

I'm not trying to protect Chabad. I'm trying to keep the conversation from degenerating any further than it already has.
I agree, but since I think we can be civil as long as you don’t credit things to known liars and cheaters and be supported by them maybe we can converse in a polite way?

[Lawrence M. Reisman]

Edd:

You refer to my sources as "known liars and cheaters." Do you even know who my sources are? People who were very close to the Satmar Rebbe for many years, enough so that they could ask him how he maintained his anti-Zionist ideology even after the Zionists saved his life. (After hearing his explanation, one of them stated "I decided then that it makes perfect sense for the Satmar Rebbe to feel the way does. I don't know that it makes sense for anyone else, but for him it does.")

[edd]

The known liars and cheaters who were close to him? Please, names names names! And I was referring to the web host, which has zero I mean zero integrity he wont even lay down he’s site!
He’s anti Zionist approach had been all Rabbonim’s approach till the six-day war, as evident from the letters the R Rashab send out and hes son.

[Lawrence M. Reisman]

Dear Edd:

"Please, names names names!" Sorry, but I have to protect the privacy of my sources on this.

[edd]

All right, lets hear it!

[Name Withheld]

The Rebbe's Greatest Achievement
All through the Dark and Middle Ages when Jews went to the stake and died cause they would't become idol worshippers.
The Rebbe causees thousands to BE idol worshippers.
At least with Chistianity one would worship a gold g-d adorned with jewals and all that,
The Rebbe is just a crummy tin g-d that got lying numeous times
TRUTH NOW! EMET ACKSOV!

[Joe]

>>correct me if my logic is wrong.

Its wrong. The balance of the paragraph, therefore, is irrelevant.

>>Now I can tell you this odds are you may have learnt Shas thru a Artscroll maybe a few Tosfes in your years a few Mahrshas and few Mahram Shiff maybe some Rashbas sprinkle in a few Boruch Bers and a few Shaggas Aryes, a little ktzos, A GENUIOUS YOU ARE NOT!

What is this? You are literally making things up! Again!

>>This isn’t a blow its merely to prove my point, you say you’re a maven, prove it!
Why do I have to prove the Rebbes genius maybe you should prove yours since bashfully you said you are, how the tables turn.

Now you are just avoiding the question. You initially attempted to say I cannot relate to what is good because I don't know what is good. Now that I am telling you that I do, you are asking me to prove it so that you can, again, avoid my one, simple question.

I will conclude with some two paragraphs by Edd, because they apply to your inability and refusal to egnage in decency and provide answers to the questions you were being asked:

"I am going to be as candid as I can, you opinion is subjected and has been proven to be wrong and fallible you not only disregard every scholar who disputes you but you bash them wrongfully, you lack integrity maturity and above all honor, which is why the petty arguments of how many times he learnt Shass is truly irrelevant, and arguing with you is neither insightful or meaningful, what I have learnt in my day is that argue with a man about learning you will learn, argue about opinions and you will become dull and dirty.

"You don’t know what the Rebbe knew and you disregard torah in general, so I don’t have respect for you and regard you as a fool that lacks credibility, why should I debate with you what the Rebbe knew? Even if I prove it you wont respect it, its like playing cards with a man who always cheats, its something one avoids."

Same for me. You guess what I know, malign my character and intentions, insult my scholarship, turn all reason and respeactability on its head just to avoid confronting the simply question I asked.

As Edd wrote, it goes both ways. No one answered my question--no one.

This is a complete mockery and exposes you as a mindless worshipper who cares not for truth, decency or basic morals. You know nothing about your Rebbe. Was he really given semicha from the Rogachover? Was he a talmid chochom? I don't know. But I do know that you were asked a simple question, and instead of answering it, you have demonstrated that YOU clearly care not one wit for Hashem, for his Torah, and His ways. You may like your Rebbe, but that clearly has nothing to do with Hashem in your case.

[avi]

Joe,

Anyone with an ounce of credibility, who would go on record with such outlandish criticism, would at least attempt to study the source material, namely in this case, the Rebbe's works. Your effort in this regard is: "I read some of his sichos". My only comment to you is: What unadulterated Chutzpah!

Anyone with an iota of "derech eretz" would never make your statement: "HOW do we know he actually was a talmid chochom?"

Edd thoroughly disproved you and, disproved your scholarship. You have totally lost the argument (sic) and, in the process, have shown disrespect to other Torah scholars. In addition, your "sincere intention" has been exposed for what it really is.

I must say that the entire topic is ridiculous and insulting. Isn’t 50 years of learning and over 60 seforim enough? Does the Rebbe’s honor and scholarship constantly have to be proven to every fool?

Although you claim to be learned, your own posts demonstrate that you are neither a chochom nor a G-d fearing Jew. You need to do Tshuvah for your disrespect to the Gedolim and their Torah!

p.s. Shmarya, you DID say you were closing the site down.
p.s.s. Edd, that "candid" commment to Shmarya was particularly erudite and poetic

Avi

[Shmarya]

p.s. Shmarya, you DID say you were closing the site down. .

Simply false.

Further, the Rebbe wrote almost nothing. Sichot – speeches – that need to be extensively edited by a team of editors is not writing.

As for scholarship, the Rebbe knew a lot of Chabad hasidut. There are many examples of the Rebbe misquoting or confusing halakha and talmudic sources.

An easy one for you to see is the Rebbe's din kadima statement with regard to Ethiopian Jews.

As I've noted many times, there is no source in halakha for that claim. The Rebbe completely misapplies the halakha and confuses it.

>>Anyone with an ounce of credibility, who would go on record with such outlandish criticism, would at least attempt to study the source material, namely in this case, the Rebbe's works. Your effort in this regard is: "I read some of his sichos". My only comment to you is: What unadulterated Chutzpah!

I did at least attemt to study the source material. My problem is I did not have enough source material. That is why I asked for more. You are making false, disingenuous arguments.

>>Anyone with an iota of "derech eretz" would never make your statement: "HOW do we know he actually was a talmid chochom?"

You are trying to create a pgam in me so that you can avoid your obvious chisronos. This is, again, an evasive manuever. And it once again points very strongly to the fact that you are blindly worshipping someone you have no actual knowledge about. I am seeing to know him. You cannot even do that.

>>Edd thoroughly disproved you and, disproved your scholarship. You have totally lost the argument (sic) and, in the process, have shown disrespect to other Torah scholars. In addition, your "sincere intention" has been exposed for what it really is.

I did not once engage Edd. A request for examples of chiddushei Torah cannot be disproved--that makes no sense. Similarly, I did not engage in conversations with him concerning my scholarship. So, again, you are lying. You were the one who showed disrespect to Torah scholars. And your continuous lies are extremely insulting.

>>I must say that the entire topic is ridiculous and insulting. Isn’t 50 years of learning and over 60 seforim enough? Does the Rebbe’s honor and scholarship constantly have to be proven to every fool?

Another false argument and gratuitous insult. I explained--several times--why I want to know more about him. YOu are merely resorting to your same evasive tactics.

>>Although you claim to be learned, your own posts demonstrate that you are neither a chochom nor a G-d fearing Jew. You need to do Tshuvah for your disrespect to the Gedolim and their Torah!

This makes no sense. Again. As I quoted from Edd before, and demonstrated in my earlier post, you have no interest in dialogue, you cannot answer one simple, pointed question without hashing out into personal attacks and vicious character assasination. That is pretty pathetic, considering your claim that we are talking about a Gadol B'Torah.

This whole nonsense about losing an argument makes no sense as I never advanced an argument, it was a request. Edd, as far as I can tell, did not respond to any of my posts, either. I would be glad to write with him. But your posts, to be frank, are so completely removed from reality, and your arguments so disingenuous and indiciative of ignorance and sinas chinam, that I will not write with you again. Not unless you can act like a mentch.

I don't mind talking to dumb people--God knows I try--but you are too dumb to realize how utterly evil, corrupt and foolish you sound. You have not written one single redeeming, thoughtful post.

You are a liar, an embaressment to the Gadol you call your Rebbe, and a sonei Hashem.

You are a bizayon to the Jewish people.

[Steve]

Avi,

Joe ripped you to shreds EVERY time. And I don't see how Edd did anything you claim you did.

You are living in a dream world. And you really do sound like a complete and utter nutter!!!

Are you a meshugeneh just like Ariel? You sure sound like it!

[Ron]

As part of the silent majority here, I have to put in my two cents here after reading the thread, Avi's repeated lies, and Joe's adroit, thought out, sincere and highly intelligent answers.

Avi, you are nuts, and have no compunction to say sheker.

You have no credibility because you lie. Joe sounds brilliant, respectful, extremely polite, and, yes, he creamed you. I would not be surprised if he'd do the same to Edd.

So go back home, learn a little. Maybe, in another lifetime, you will be in the position to argue with Joe.

Try HASC, I hear they do wonders.

[Foyleh]

I have to agree with the above. Avi = loser. Avi = scum. Avi = liar.

joe, you are too good to even be on the same thread as that piece of white trash,

[Aron]

Man,

Avi, looks like you are being crushed!!! Sorry, but I have to agree with everyone here. You lied, look really nuts/crazy, and your posts make no sense. Joe demolished you through and through.

Are you just doing this as a joke, cause that's what it looks like!

[avi]

Shmarya

“Further, the Rebbe wrote almost nothing.”
This is comical. Please qualify “almost nothing” in the context of over 50 years of leadership. You can’t. End of story.

“Sichot – speeches”
First of all, even if the Rebbe only said “speeches” (which is patently NOT true) – so what? There are many Gedolim that did not write – A famous example: the Arizal.

“-that need to be extensively edited by a team of editors is not writing. “

Edd quoted, from reliable sources on the actual team, that you are WRONG! The Rebbe constantly corrected the editors and provided the sources, NOT as you claim.

“you DID say you were closing the site down.” Simply false.
Shmarya, confess. You wrote that you were going to close the site down. I remember, because I enjoyed reading all the congratulations you were receiving.

BTW, One of your most illogical statements is this supposed “Rosh Yeshivah” “correcting” the Rebbe on video. If Chabad whitewashes everything why would they put this on a “Chabad” video? Also why can’t YOU provide the source/date/details of this video? This site relies totally on innuendo and slander – and you are the chief!

“As for scholarship, the Rebbe knew a lot of Chabad hasidut. There are many examples of the Rebbe misquoting or confusing halakha and talmudic sources. An easy one for you to see is the Rebbe's din kadima statement with regard to Ethiopian Jews. As I've noted many times, there is no source in halakha for that claim. The Rebbe completely misapplies the halakha and confuses it.”

LOL. Yes, you’ve noted it ad nauseum and EVERY time you have been refuted. Get over it.

Regards,

Avi

He was not refuted, liar. Look up a dictionary, you probably don't even understand the meaning of the words you are employing.

[Joe]

Wow, what can I say. To use your childish, irrelevant comments, looks like you're being crushed!

[avi]

Joe/Steve/Ron/Aron/Foyleh

Please pick one name. That’s the general rule in blogging.

“I did at least attempt to study the source material. My problem is I did not have enough source material. That is why I asked for more. You are making false, disingenuous arguments.

Oh really? “I read some of his sichos”, “I did not have enough”.

This is not a credible argument. A rational person would make never make such an outlandish public “evaluation” of anyone’s scholarship based on this admission.

Anyone with an iota of "derech eretz" would never make your statement: "HOW do we know he actually was a talmid chochom?"“You are trying to create a pgam in me so that you can avoid your obvious chisronos.”

You honestly expect us to believe that your ridiculous statement is valid and sincere !!? This is not a pgam. It's much worse!

"I did not once engage Edd. A request for examples of chiddushei Torah cannot be disproved."

If that’s all it is then go the Kehot.com. But we all know your motives.

“You were the one who showed disrespect to Torah scholars. And your continuous lies are extremely insulting.”

I wrote 2 posts. I have not insulted 1 Torah Scholar!

You however stated:
“I would not say that the Rogachover was great”. “I am not going on and on about R' Moshe. We all know who he was. I have nothing to gain from it.”
"I don't believe Rav Eliyahu said that. Furthermore, I would be a lot more impressed if someone like Rav Ovadya Yosef said it (as he actually knows all the codes).”

"This whole nonsense about losing an argument makes no sense as I never advanced an argument, it was a request."

It was NOT a request. It is slander pure and simple! It is a bizayon of a Torah scholars' honor namely the Rebbe.

Right out of the starting gate you make outrageous statements and slander (

“WHAT SCHOLARSHIP!!??, “After all the lies Chabad tells you”, HOW do we know he actually was a talmid chochom? I know he argued with people a lot bigger than him, who is to say he was anything special in his own right? Evidence? Anything? Didn't think so. "

You follow this up with: google, 911, paris, sorbonne etc

NOW you try to sanitize it by saying it’s a simple “request”. You are not fooling anyone!

For the record. Go to kehot.com and buy a sefer. Or ask a Lubavitcher to lend you one.

Regards,
Avi

[Joe]

Avi,

Everyone here sees how you lied and attempted impute motives or statements to me. You are pathetic, crass, attempted to insult my scholarship, and you are not in the position to argue with me.

I never made that comment about the Rogachover. My reaosnable question is on the Rebbe alone. And I explained it. And I am getting his Hadronim. I will post my thoughts when I finish them.

Lies are lies. They include the lie that he was a better student than RYBS when the Rebbe was not even a student there!!! They include unqualified assertions of fact like, "the greatest scholar of the 20th century." I did research on google. Its ugly.

Your lies about Edd and everything else you read are all on this thread for everyone to see. You cannot get away with it by constantly reframing the issues.

You were pwned. You are disgusting. And if you cannot contribute anything to my quest to understand and know the Rebbe, then bug off--go back into your cave and mindlessly worship a man you know nothing about in the guise of a religion and God you cannot care less for.

You disgust everyone on this board.

[Joe]

Avi,

Everyone here sees how you lied and attempted impute motives or statements to me. You are pathetic, crass, attempted to insult my scholarship, and you are not in the position to argue with me.

I never made that comment about the Rogachover. My reaosnable question is on the Rebbe alone. And I explained it. And I am getting his Hadronim. I will post my thoughts when I finish them.

Lies are lies. They include the lie that he was a better student than RYBS when the Rebbe was not even a student there!!! They include unqualified assertions of fact like, "the greatest scholar of the 20th century." I did research on google. Its ugly.

Your lies about Edd and everything else you read are all on this thread for everyone to see. You cannot get away with it by constantly reframing the issues.

You were pwned. You are disgusting. And if you cannot contribute anything to my quest to understand and know the Rebbe, then bug off--go back into your cave and mindlessly worship a man you know nothing about in the guise of a religion and God you cannot care less for.

You disgust everyone on this board.

[Shmarya]

Avi –

Shmarya, confess. You wrote that you were going to close the site down. I remember, because I enjoyed reading all the congratulations you were receiving.

You do not remember very well.

As for the rest of what you write, you really do not know the definition of refute or refutation.

Sicha corrections went both ways – from the editors and from the Rebbe.

Again, he knew a lot of hasidut Chabad. But he made frequent errors in halakha and in nigleh.

[Shmarya]

WARNING:

Use only your real name --OR-- one alias. No switching between different aliases on this or any other post.

If you are Joe here, you are only Joe here and only Joe on every other post.

The same holds true for Avi and any other commenters.

If you violate this and I notice it, I'll ban you.

[Joe]

>>You do not remember very well.

>>As for the rest of what you write, you really do not know the definition of refute or refutation.

Shmarya,

You could not be more correct. Avi does not really seem to be familiar with the English language, nor does he appear to have faculty of mind to engage with others. Honesty and truth are the last things on his mind. Not when his mindless, meaningless life is being exposed for what it truly is.

[Edd]

“Sicha corrections went both ways – from the editors and from the Rebbe”
“Edd quoted, from reliable sources on the actual team, that you are WRONG! The Rebbe constantly corrected the editors and provided the sources, NOT as you claim”
Avi words of truth and grace!
Shmarya, you make as if you were in the Vad Hasichas, this I can guarantee this is fiction.
“Further, the Rebbe wrote almost nothing. Sichot – speeches – that need to be extensively edited by a team of editors is not writing”
Let everyone know that this is a total perversion of the truth, I happen to have asked many people that were on the Vad, Avremel Chartonov ,Yossi Jacobson, Simon Jacobson, They will tell you of the times the Rebbe got very upset at the mistakes they were making, and the sharp notes the Rebbe replied, and of the notes asking the Rebbe question, I have personally seen these notes, the Rebbe edited and re-edit the Sichas that used to come out(they would shorten it to get into a likut and make mistakes in the process) THEY NEVER I MEAN NEVER IN THEIR RIGHT MINDS CORRECTED THE REBBE, I SAY NEVER !
Like I said to joe I will give you their telephone numbers!
Shmarya give me a detailed account and I’ll show you the total disregard for the truth, and the idiotic fabrications, go get a life.
“Further, the Rebbe wrote almost nothing. Sichot – speeches – that need to be extensively edited by a team of editors is not writing”
Did you go through the Hagadah, Rishimo, Hatomim which the Rebbe Edited? Besides I think editing thousand of Sichos and Igros constitutes as writing and printing when it’s all your material, as Avi Poetically stated.
Avi quoted “Also why can’t YOU provide the source/date/details of this video”
I have been asking the question for a while, think I would get a reply?
You like Houdini with these questions.

“An easy one for you to see is the Rebbe's din kadima statement with regard to Ethiopian Jews”
How many times does Avi and the World have to REFUTE you to admit you know zero Halcha?
Ron, Go learn something, IS THAT YOU JOE? Kiddin around
On to Joe.
“it was a request. Edd, as far as I can tell, did not respond to any of my posts, either.”
I gave you Torat Menachem Hadronim Al HaRambam V`Shas to learn, and when you do I would be happy to show you the genius or you can go to R’ Shochet in LA and speak to him, R’ Yoel Kahn I think would give you some time of day, or pick a Sicha of the Rebbe we can learn and be happy.
Or go to http://chabadlibrary.org/books/
And learn something Rishimos you might enjoy and when you learn a topic get back to me!
One more thing, your impudent behavior towards Avi only proves my point that educated you may be bit it does show me that you lack wisdom or tact, what intelligent and level-headed person would reply the way you have? (Shmarya I expect it from, but you? You’re not doing a good job on the PR side)
Please don’t make me go into this again I think you realize your childish acts.
If I cause you to learn sichos because of this it would have been worth conversing with you, not that if you don’t it wasn’t, but lessen it would.

[Shmarya]

They sent the Rebbe a list of possible meanings. Does the Rebbe mean a or b? Is the Rebbe referring to this posek in x rather than in y, which doesn't seem to be right? etc.

They did this regularly.

Again, the Rebbe knew a lot of hasidiut Chabad and much less of halakha and gemara.

And, no, Edd, Avi did not prove me wrong. Din kadima is a halakhic concept with a real definition – and the Rebbe got it wrong.

[avi]

Shmarya,

B”H, my memory of your blog is fleeting, but, help me out here.

Did you not post a few months ago, in a moment of sanity, that you were quitting?
Or something to that effect?

“you really do not know the definition of refute or refutation”.
Sorry. I forgot to reference the “Shmarya Alternate Reality Dictionary”. Mail me a copy.

“But he made frequent errors in halakha and in nigleh”

Unsubstantiated. "frequent"? Please bring proof other than your cause celebre. Readers can refer to the myriad posts on that topic.

Joe,
You obviously do not follow the basic “no name calling rule”, nevertheless:

“I am getting his Hadronim. I will post my thoughts when I finish them.”
I’ll give you the benefit of doubt.

“My reaosnable question”
Your original comment was nether “reasonable” nor a question. It was a snide affront to a Manhig B’Yisroel. You should apologize for your disrespectful tone. Hopefully, your learning the Rebbe’s Torah will be a Kaporah.

Regards,

Avi

[Edd]

“They sent the Rebbe a list of possible meanings. Does the Rebbe mean a or b? Is the Rebbe referring to this posek in x rather than in y, which doesn't seem to be right? etc.
They did this regularly”

Shmarya Where do you know this? I just spoke to Avremel Chartonov last night and he was there always, he didn’t paint the picture you are. If I’m misunderstanding you, the fact is the source the Rebbe gave they always put in the likut, period. And please give the proof of this? You said you were in the room at the time, what year?
Joe, you can blame Avi here he has allot to go on from your words that you weren’t the most respectful (the Yaurmulka for one) and the typo from the Rogotchover it was misleading and a few other sentences that weren’t very politically correct,don’t blame him just get on the good side and say that you don’t see the brilliance which is fine ,not stating facts.

[Edd]

Joe, you can't ^^^^^^^^^^^^

[Shmarya]

Avi – I said I was slowing down, not quitting.

Edd – I know what I was told over the years in answer to my questions. I would hear a sicha, wonder about a siurce, check it and not find it. The source would be corrected in the printed version (not because of me, BTW).

That happened several times. Again, I also asked manis Friedman and others who translated sichot about certain things. Very often the answer was, "I don't know what the Rebbe meant." The Rebbe would later clarify (AKA, fix the source) before publication.

[edd]

“I know what I was told over the years in answer to my questions. I would hear a sicha, wonder about a source, check it and not find it. The source would be corrected in the printed version (not because of me, BTW).
That happened several times. Again, I also asked manis Friedman and others who translated sichot about certain things. Very often the answer was, "I don't know what the Rebbe meant." The Rebbe would later clarify (AKA, fix the source) before publication”

A few problems with the story, the Rebbe in sichas was very vague about the source and often did not say any, period, so you asking the source which contradicted the Rebbe is a pure lie, because if you watch videos you would see that like any speaker in the world while he’s speaking he does not quote he’s source, he just says the line and moves on to the point, on the other hand when someone writes something sources are mandatory ,therefore you can question a source, so that fact that you saw it “ CORRECTED” would mean you had access to pre-likut edition of the Sicha, which I know to be false.

“Check it and not find it”

Oh so you know the whole Shass, Poskim, Rishonim, Achronim, Zohar, Kabblah, Chasidus word for word? It’s a rhetorical question

Unless you saw a source the Rebbe gave and then and only then checked it up and saw it to be wrong(which you never gave me, you are very evasive about when, where, what, as you always are and will be) but again that would mean you had early edition of the Sicha’s, WHICH I KNOW TO BE A CROCK OF CRAP!

Second, your problem exists even with asking Manis Freidman since he only translated the audio feed of the Rebbe’s talk into English and therefore was not involved and or very active in the source lookup, therefore asking intent on something would make sense asking a source would be foolish since it wasn’t he’s department, it was the people that wrote notes to the Rebbe and were part of putting it into writing and/or editing the Hebrew edition for a likut.

So stating the “(AKA, fix the source)” after asking Mannis Freidnman is your own fabrications and one big sham!

I am surprised I have to tell you all this because if you are trying to tell me how the system worked and/or fool me then you better start getting to facts (ahem! Lies) in order!

I would like to point to everyone who reads this:

These are all lies, and he adds a minute of truth as any semi intelligent person would do when they know that what they are stating perverts the truth, he had zero access to pre print Sichos, he asked Manis Freidman which as good as a man is as he is, is not the most knowladgble of the people that were working around the Sichas ,so him not knowing a source is only normal.(even R Yoel Kahn and R Melach Zwibel often had no sources, which they would tell you, the Rebbe pointed it out exactly where it was) Any “correction” that he knows about because he saw it, he couldn’t , we got the same likut at the same time and therefore would have had to correct it publicly when everyone knows , a date would be easy!….. Lies lies lies.

[Edd]

While the Chabad Rebbes would deliver their discourses, certain disciples with a photographic memory were appointed to memorise every word they heard. This is known as the role of the choizer. After consultation with other choizrim (plural of choizer), the choizer would typically then transcribe the words that he remembered, and this transcript, known as a hanocho (pl. hanochos), was then released for public study. The hanochos of Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson's talks are available in the Sichos Kodesh and Hisvaduyos series.

The other type of hanochos were those made in preparing Likkutei Sichos, Schneerson's largest and most monumental work. For this task, Schneerson's talks (by his own instruction) were not just recorded word for word, but rearranged and fleshed out according to the judgment of the meinichim. Often several related talks from different years were merged together. On many occasions Rabbi Schneerson was not satisfied with the text as submitted, and it had to be reworked several times. The same process was repeated for the Rebbe's smaller Maamorim Melukat, a collection of Schneerson's Chassidic discourses. These often lengthy talks and discourses were always submitted to Rabbi Schneerson for a final editing, and then they released for public study.'

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meiniach

[edd]

Background Information

Before we get to the interview, a little background information is necessary to define exactly what is meant by a “sicha.”

At each farbrengen, the Rebbe would speak on an extremely wide range of subjects, touching on halacha to Talmudic teachings to current events. In most cases, a text of the Rebbe’s words would then be produced based on the recollection of those who were present. This text, which followed the actual flow of topics as they were mentioned by the Rebbe, was known as a “hanacha bilti muga,” an “unedited version” of an entire farbrengen. Although a “hanacha bilti muga” has the advantage of following the exact order of the Rebbe’s development of various themes, its obvious disadvantage is that it was not officially “approved” by the Rebbe, raising the possibility of inaccuracies. For this reason, a “hanacha bilti muga” is not considered an “authentic” sicha.

In addition to these unedited sichos, there were also special publications coming out each week under the heading of Likkutei Sichos. These booklets were arranged according to topic, usually the Torah portion of the week or a particular Yom Tov, and would contain a number of the Rebbe’s sichos relating to that subject. While these weekly publications did not convey a farbrengen in its entirety, the particular topic under discussion would be presented in great depth.

The greatest advantage of these Likkutei Sichos booklets was that they were edited by the Rebbe, complete with notations and footnotes. These sichos received the official “imprimatur of the king,” and were approved by the Rebbe as accurate.

The enormous task of editing the Rebbe’s sichos kodesh was assigned to the Vaad L’hafotzas Sichos. The Vaad is composed of a staff of exceptional talmidei chachomim with decades of experience in interpreting and editing the Rebbe’s sichos and maamarim. Its offices are a virtual beis midrash, with hundreds of reference volumes to assist them in transforming “hanachos” into “sichos.” Obviously, the exact meaning of the Rebbe’s words must be completely understood before a sicha can be submitted to the Rebbe for his approval. Whatever points remain unclear must be clarified by the Rebbe himself.

Turning a hanacha into a sicha is a joint effort involving all the members of the Vaad. Because some hanachos may have been produced hastily, inaccuracies in meaning or context sometimes crept in. Also, because the hanachos were a reflection of oral speech, they contained many repetitions that are not appropriate in a written work. Furthermore, because the Rebbe would speak on the same subject on different occasions, each time revealing another facet or responding to questions that had arisen in the interim, the Vaad would have to “create” a unified sicha taking all of these factors into account.

After the Vaad agreed on a version, the next step involved submitting it to Rabbis Yehoshua Dubrowski and Tzvi Hirsh Gansberg for linguistic and grammatical fine-tuning. The Rebbe once commented about Rabbi Dubrowski, “When Dubrowski makes something, it’s worthy of being printed.” Rabbi Dubrowski also wrote the hanachos that appeared in the magazine Di Yiddishe Heim, about which the Rebbe said, “I have never seen such a good hanacha.”

At that point, a sicha would be ready to be submitted to the Rebbe. The Rebbe would edit it once, then return it to the Vaad with his corrections. This would often take place in the middle of the night, prompting members of the Vaad to rush off to the printing presses to correct whatever needed fixing. The sicha would then be submitted to the Rebbe a second time, and on rare occasions, a third.

For the purpose of clarification, the full roster of members of the Vaad consists of Rabbis Nachman Schapiro and Yaakov Leib Altein, assisted by Rabbis Elimelech Zwiebel, and Sholom Dov Ber Lipsker. For many years, Rabbis Yosef Yitzchok Wilshansky and Dovid Olidort also participated. Rabbis Schneur Zalman Chanin and Shalom Jacobson are responsible for the actual printing.

http://beismoshiach.org/Feature/Feature270/feature270.htm

[Shmarya]

1. Normal people when speaking DO cite sources. Go to any Litvishe yeshiva and listen to a shmooze. Go to any NON-Chabad hasidic yeshiva.

2. The Rebbe did cite sources (not all the time, which itself is problematic) and he did err.

3. The Wikipedia entry proves nothing. Chabad actively fights any and all references to the Rebbe's problems. You can see this if you are able to edit.

[Shmarya]

Here's the real question, Edd –

Did any of the 7 Lubavicher rebbes ever err? Did they ever cite incorrect sources? Say something was a historical fact that turned out to be false? Or arfe they all infallible?

Care to answer that? Be specific in your answer. If there were errors, cite them.

[edd]

And For you Joe!
What were some specific instructions the Rebbe gave you regarding Likkutei Sichos?
One time we had prepared a Likut that was extremely complex, requiring a great deal of knowledge of Chassidus in order to understand it. The Rebbe told us that the Likkutei Sichos were intended for everyone, even someone who had never learned in Tomchei Tmimim and had only a superficial background in Chassidus.
From that point on, whenever we had to choose a sicha, we always tried to find one that would appeal to non-Lubavitchers, as well. The Likkutei Sichos are like the written Torah – accessible to every Jew, while at the same time revealing greater depth the more they are studied. The Rebbe’s sichos can be understood even by someone who lacks a high level of formal Torah education. The talmid chacham may derive more, but even the simple Jew will find them comprehensible.
The unbelievable depth of the Likkutei Sichos can be seen in the footnotes. Many of the greatest geonim of our generation have expressed wonder at them. There were instances when the Rebbe wrote long letters of explanation in response to a question about the footnotes.
One time we weren’t sure that we understood what the Rebbe meant in a footnote. We wrote it in our own words, and asked the Rebbe if we were correct. The Rebbe replied: “I meant several things…”

“Reb Zev Horowitz of Brazil is one of the major financial backers of the Likkutei Sichos. One time during Sunday “dollars,” when Reb Zev presented the Rebbe with the newest volume that had just been published, the Rebbe asked him if he knew the reason why the Brazilian coin is known as the “cruzeiro.” Reb Zev did not know, so the Rebbe explained:
“Cruzeiro” is similar to the English word “cruise,” which means to sail by boat. In the same way a ship sails from place to place over the sea, money passes from hand to hand and makes its way around the country.
“These books,” the Rebbe said, indicating the Likkutei Sichos, “also ‘sail’ from place to place, and are likewise found all over the world…”
Sealed with the King’s Imprimatur
From the moment the Rebbe Rayatz appointed the Rebbe Melech HaMoshiach in charge of the Kehos Publication Society, the Rebbe always paid particular attention to the books’ Foreword (pesach davar).
In the early days the Rebbe would compose them himself. Later, when the Rebbe’s time was at a premium, he would personally edit the Foreword of every single volume and affix the date on the bottom as a sign of approval. This was also done with the Likkutei Sichos, each of which was personally edited by the Rebbe. Even sixth and seventh editions received the same consideration, with the Rebbe always signing the date at the bottom margin.
It is for this reason that the Vaad always reprints the Forewords of every previous edition when publishing a new one, even though the text has remained the same.

Same source as before. fascinating read1!

[Shmarya]

Edd writes:…the Rebbe asked him if he knew the reason why the Brazilian coin is known as the “cruzeiro.” Reb Zev did not know, so the Rebbe explained:
“Cruzeiro” is similar to the English word “cruise,” which means to sail by boat. In the same way a ship sails from place to place over the sea, money passes from hand to hand and makes its way around the country.
“These books,” the Rebbe said, indicating the Likkutei Sichos, “also ‘sail’ from place to place, and are likewise found all over the world…”Not really. Here is what Cruzerio means:http://www.answers.com/topic/cruzeiro

cru·zei·ro (krū-zâr'ō, -zā'rʊ) pronunciation
n., pl. -ros.

A unit of currency formerly used in Brazil.

[Portuguese, from cruz, cross (from the figure on the coin), from Latin crux.]And here is origin of the word cruise:http://www.answers.com/cruise?cat=technology

Dutch kruisen, to cross, from kruis, cross, from Middle Dutch cruce, from Latin crux, cruc-, cross.]So, you see, the Rebbe was only right if you say that both words have their origin in the Latin crux.

But, in reality, the coin is named after a tselem, a cross, which is idolatry for Jews. It has nothing to do with the Dutch word meaning to cross over. But it does share a meaning with the sichos and those cruzeiros used to print them – idolatry.

Again, here's the real question, Edd –

Did any of the 7 Lubavicher rebbes ever err? Did they ever cite incorrect sources? Say something was a historical fact that turned out to be false? Or arfe they all infallible?

Care to answer that? Be specific in your answer. If there were errors, cite them.

(Of course the cruzeiro error is already cited, if unintentionally, by you.)

[Edd]

You find what you want to find ah?
Shmarya you integrity sinking below ground here.

http://www.answers.com/topic/cruzeiro
cru·zei·ro (krū-zâr'ō, -zā'rʊ) pronunciation
n., pl. -ros.
A unit of currency formerly used in Brazil.
[Portuguese, from cruz, cross (from the figure on the coin)
Cruise
Português (Portuguese)
n. - cruzeiro (m)

Rebbe: “Cruzeiro” is similar to the English word “cruise,” which means to sail by boat”

What is wrong here? I really beginning to think your as dumm as a doornail
Are you seriously that moronic?

Because as you say there are a few options I don’t see and error here, even taking into account your very idiotic deductions, but you think its wrong because your always looking for one so you biased and or lack intelagince

So he could have been right? Imagine a man from Russia and then America knowing a language what you know from Awnsers.com in an instant conversation with someone?

“Did any of the 7 Lubavicher rebbes ever err? Did they ever cite incorrect sources? Say something was a historical fact that turned out to be false? Or arfe they all infallible?”
*CAUTION – THIS IS THE STUPIDEST THING IM DOING SINCE RIDING A MOTORCYCLE WITHOUT A HELMET*
*NEVER ENGAGE SHMARYA IN CONVERSATION ABOUT THEOLOGY* Ten Comandments

Are Tzadikim fallible? I don’t know. there is many source that they aren’t (so to speak meaning their mistake are intentional and/or gods will), and sources they are fallible, which one is right? I think it takes depth to understand what a mistake is, it says angels erred and they don’t even have free choice (Gavriel with Daniel), From our prospective we must believe they don’t and must listen as if they don’t err and not focus if they do or don’t relating to practice (if you’re a full practicing jew and you are discussing the torah aspect of it, then we can discuss, in this instance its not the case)
טז ולא כל העושה אות ומופת, מאמינין אותו שהוא נביא: אלא אדם שהיינו יודעין בו מתחילתו שהוא ראוי לנבואה בחכמתו ובמעשיו, שנתעלה בהן על כל בני גילו, והיה מהלך בדרכי הנבואה ובקדושתה ופרישותה, ואחר כך בא ועשה אות ומופת ואמר שהאל שילחו--מצוה לשמוע ממנו, שנאמר "אליו, תשמעון" (דברים יח,טו).
יז ואפשר שיעשה אות ומופת ואינו נביא, וזה האות יש לו דברים בגו; ואף על פי כן, מצוה לשמוע לו, הואיל ואדם גדול הוא וחכם וראוי לנבואה, מעמידין אותו על חזקתו--שבכך נצטווינו: כמו שנצטווינו לחתוך הדין על פי שניים עדים כשרים, ואף על פי שאפשר שהעידו בשקר, הואיל וכשרים הם אצלנו, מעמידין אותן על כשרותן. ובדברים האלו וכיוצא בהן, נאמר "הנסתרות--לה', אלוהינו; והנגלות לנו ולבנינו" (דברים כט,כח), ונאמר "כי האדם יראה לעיניים, וה' יראה ללבב" (שמואל א טז,ז).
א מי שאינו מאמין בתורה שבעל פה, אינו זקן ממרא האמור בתורה, אלא הרי הוא בכלל המינים, ומיתתו ביד כל אדם. [ב] מאחר שנתפרסם שהוא כופר בתורה שבעל פה--מורידין ולא מעלין, כשאר המינים והאפיקורוסין והאומרין אין תורה מן השמיים והמוסרים והמשומדים: כל אלו אינן בכלל ישראל, ואינן צריכין לא עדים ולא התראה ולא דיינין; אלא כל ההורג אחד מהן, עשה מצוה גדולה והסיר מכשול.

[Shmarya]

Edd –

It's linguistics 101. Saying “Cruzeiro” is similar to the English word “cruise,” which means to sail by boat” is like saying an aboriginal person from southern Africa is genetically similar to a Hindi from India.

But you have no real education, so how would you know that?

As for the rest of what you write, either Chabad rebbes erred or they did not. You write: From our prospective we must believe they don’t and must listen as if they don’t err and not focus if they do or don’t relating to practice

Of course, that is not Judaism. Jews understand that people – even great people – err.

Chabad has so twisted you that you do not even see this.

[avi]

Shmarya,

I don’t see the problem here. The Rebbe said the word is “similar” to cruise. He did not say the etymology of the word is cruise. This would also fit in with the role of a Tzaddik who tries to change crude and idolatrous objects/expressions into Kedusha. In this case, transforming a well-known idolatrous word into something that would have meaning for a Jew. Many Tzaddikim did the same. In fact, there is an opinion that Yiddish was created for this very reason.

Regarding the fallibility of a Tzaddik, this is not a Chabad issue, as Edd quotes from Rambam, this is a Talmudic issue that is extensively discussed regarding Angels, Moshe Rabbeinu, Shlomo etc.

Concerning one’s personal Rabbi , there have been specific debates whether one is allowed to doubt his rulings, in the slightest. This is why any Talmid would be forbidden/reluctant to say his Rabbi erred.

Regards,

Avi

[Shmarya]

It's only similar to the word cruise if you do not know the history and meanings of the words.

As for fallibility, I've had this discussion with rabbis across the frum spectrum. Only Chabad claims infallibility.

Either Chaabd rebbes made mistakes or they did not. It's a simple equation.

[Shmarya]

Concerning one’s personal Rabbi , there have been specific debates whether one is allowed to doubt his rulings, in the slightest. This is why any Talmid would be forbidden/reluctant to say his Rabbi erred.

No. That is incorrect. You have to FOLLOW the ruling of your rabbi – unless it is clearly and empirically wrong.

But that does not mean you do not recognize the errors made by your rabbi, when those errors become known.

Only Chabad understands this concept to mean that your rabbi/rebbe never errs.

[Edd]

“it's linguistics 101. Saying “Cruzeiro” is similar to the English word “cruise,” which means to sail by boat”
“So, you see, the Rebbe was only right if you say that both words have their origin in the Latin crux”

Here is logic 101 which you don’t have a education in so why would you know this?
The Rebbe made a statement that you claim to be right and you are arguing? He would have been “only right” if he said it was the “ONLY” origin meaning and reason but he didn’t, do you understand? It’s like talking to a child.

Of course, that is not Judaism. Jews understand that people – even great people – err.
Chabad has so twisted you that you do not even see this.
As Avi states it is not a Chabad issue, but nevertheless you choose to push it onto our conversation to defend your lies about correcting the Rebbe, when you yourself state he didn’t quote sources when he spoke therefore all your lies comes crashing down, nevertheless the question I have for you is, who are you to be making bold statements about Judaism and weather Tzaddikim err or not? Tosfas has a issues with A) Tzadikim err and B) the horse of Pinchas Ben Yair not eating trief meat and he answers that when they are in public they don’t err and in private they can (Joe you wanna chat?)And you so simply state your opinion in black and white, truth and false manner in three lines
“”””As for the rest of what you write, either Chabad rebbes erred or they did not””””
When it takesT osfas 10, who are you? Who gives you this chutzpah? Gee you just need a good old fashion beating to clear your head!
Finally a man with wisdom , Avi:
“This would also fit in with the role of a Tzaddik who tries to change crude and idolatrous objects/expressions into Kedusha. In this case, transforming a well-known idolatrous word into something that would have meaning for a Jew. Many Tzaddikim did the same. In fact, there is an opinion that Yiddish was created for this very reason”
Why go so far, how about the name of our month?

[Shmarya]

Edd –

You're in way over your head.

The Rebbe did not know the origins of the words. Period. End of story.

As for the rest of what you write, I answered all that clearly in the comment immediately above yours.

[Edd]

And The reply in that Gemara is: “because some people are ACTING STUPID I should destroy the whole world”
“are we dealing with IDIOTS?”
Apparently we are! and thank god he didn’t anoint Shamraya in any leadership positions, what so ever! Bless god above!

[Shmarya]

But your Rebbe did exactly that – so I guess he erred, eh?

[Edd]

What do you mean by infallible? Do you mean "incapable by nature of committing an error"? Or do you mean "never actually committed an error, but could have"?

Friend, I think you need to learn some Tanya to understand how Chassidus BASED ON GEMARA ETC. looks at a Tzadik. No, a Tsadik is INCAPABLE of sinning. A Tzadik Gamur or not Gamur has no Yetzer Horo to entice him away from what Hashem wants.

The Rebbe never actually misquoted a Posuk, but yes, did at times not quote it precisely. That might make him fallible, but not capable of sinning. I think you have sinning and being infallible confused in your mind.

And no, to beleive the Rebbe was infallible is NOT the same as beleiving he was Hashem. For if Hashem decided that he should be infallible, he would be. We say clearly in Gemara, "4 died due to the poison of the snake" and they had no sin of their own! So if Hashem decided someone should be infallible, the Gemara says it is possible.

To tell you a Chassidishe Maaseh (and not of Lubavitch, just in case you are prejudiced, Reb Meir Premishlaner would walk over a hill every day to the Mikvah. One day it was very icy, and he walked over the hill just the same. Two atheists in town decided that if he can do it, so can they. They attempted to climb the hill, and fell down and seriously injured themselves. They later asked Reb Meir, "how was it that we fell and you did not?" His answer was, Meir is tied to above, and when one is tied to above he doesn't fall.

So too, Chassidim beleive the Rebbe was "tied to above", and everything he did was based on Hashem's guidance. If you want similar examples in Torah, Moshe Rabbeinu commited an error, didn't he? He hit the rock instead of talking to it. Yet we explain that "Nora Alila Al Bnei Adam", Hashem actually libelled Moshe and in a sense used this as an "excuse" not to let Moshe in to Eretz Yisroel. The same applies to Adam Harishon, he did an error, didn't he? He ate the forbidden fruit! Yet just the same, we explain that Hashem wanted an excuse to decree death on mankind.

I don't understand? Do we beleive that Moshe and Adam were infallible?

Friend, before posting about Tzaddikim and Chassidim, please learn Tanya in depth so that you know how we view these issues.

chabadtalk.com quote from bittul

[Shmarya]

I have learned Tanya, Edd. Only Chabad understands the issue this way. No other normative Jewish group does.

You might want to get out more.

[edd]

As we said, a Misnaged doesn't understand how Chassidus views Hashem and Elokus. Go learn Tanya, as I said also.

Hashem cannot violate his Torah because HE chose so. Not because the Rambam says, not because you say. The Rambam is establishing what Hashem established. Of course, to you, it's the Rambam establishing limits to Hashem - nice Misnagdishe viewpoint.

Again, if Hashem made 4 people who died Betyo Shel Nochosh, that means that it is not against Torah for a human to be infallible.

Ahhhh, throw in the emotions! J****! Yoshke! He makes a good figurehead for a Misnaged, you know. I think every Misnaged secretly beleives he is G-d.

As I said, TORAH says that Hashem was looking for an excuse to not let Moshe in to Eretz Yisroel. Or do you only accept the parts of Torah that you like?

I like your definition of sin: "Anything I think another person did against Hashem's will, notwithstanding the fact that many Meforshim twist and turn to explain that it was NOT actually a sin."

I like that! So now every Gadol gets thrown in to the pot! Would you please point out where he misquoted a Posuk? Or is this just another emotional rant? And I mean misquoting as in bringing the completely wrong Posuk, not as in missing a word or two or changing them. If that's misquoting, then you misquote Pesukim from Tehilim every day in Davening.

And btw, the moderator in FrumTeen makes sure to look good: He never allows a post which logically attacks his points - only those that make the poster look like a fool, or give him an opportunity to make more inane statements.

To end off, again, go learn Tanya. It's healthy for your soul. I could say it again and again, but either you got the point, or more probable, you didn't and won't.

Same source from above!
at least you didn't lose all your
creditbilty!

[Shmarya]

Moshe Rabbaynu made mistakes. He was not perfect.

Adam HaRishon also made mistakes and was not perfect.

Your Rebbe made mistakes, too, Edd. He was not perfect.

[edd]

One source I will give myself.

About a Tzadik making Mistakes when qouting Pesukim I will qoute and translate (with minor interspersion -- to make it suitable for the reader -- in brackets) the Alter Rebbes view on the Subject.

In a Short Maamer (3 lines) in "Mamore Admer Hazoken Haktzorim" p 572 the A.R. says thus: "[to understand] the reason why we find in Zohar many times many secrets [being expounded] on versus, but alas the [original] verse is not written so [and doesn't fit the homilies]?"

"In [the sefer] Magid Meishorim [from the angelic preacher who tought the Beis Yosef mystical ideas] at the end, [it says]: That this is how the verse is renderd [only] in the [fallible] human mind, since he doesn't merit [to see or hear the way how the homily is connected to the "errorless" verse] so he forgets it, and they are hiding it from him, but the concepts are true nonetheless".

So here we have the Chasidic view based and espoused originally in a preChasidisc unversally accepted text, on how to view a "Mistake" and a misquoted posuk of Gemara and Zohar and other holy Seforim, who wrote their works with the holy spirit.

Its not their Mistake, but rather your obtuseness that you can't hear or read it it the way its expounded in the upper worlds and spheres where the homily fits with the proper wording.

If you want to look up the Magid Meishorim itself, who speaks about why his own homilies are based on distorted versus, see M.M parshe Netzovim.

[edd]

same source as above!

[edd]

claim the Rebbe was infallible and omniscient. I say there is only One who is infallible and omniscient. Do we agree? If so, you guys have a very, very serious problem.>>

It depends what kind of mistakes you're talking about. The Rebbe did sometimes make mistakes, for example, the Rebbe quotes Seforim and then corrected himself ("Shuv Ra'isi" style). When the Rebbe spoke the Rebbe sometimes corrected himself betoch kdei dibur. (Though we belive that even these "mistakes" themselves are not ordinary mistakes since the Rebbe is bivchinas Merkavah etc.)

But things that the Rebbe told us TO DO, or proclamations the Rebbe made, etc. is a diff. story. Moshe Rabbeinu never made such mistakes, great Tzaddikim never made such mistakes, and neither did the Rebbe.

Re: Sinning

Depends what you mean by sinning, if you're talking about b'shogeg the Gemarah says that "Ein Hakadosh Baruch Hu meivi Takalah" even to animals of Tzaddikim (chulin 6a)!!! How much more so Tzaddikim theselves. (this is not my own kal v'chomer, it's part of the gemara's lashon) If you're talking about B'meizid. Then Ein Hachi Nami. Even a Tzaddikim could choose to sin, but only if he conciously decide to rebel against Hashem. Moshe Rabbeinu's "sin" was an entirely diff. category - see Ohr Hachaim Hakadosh on the Posuk.

Same Source as above.

they say everything i have to in better words, good site!

[Shmarya]

Edd –

The idea the Bais Yosef cites does not mean that tzaddikim do not err.

The Bais Yosef needs to explain obvious mistakes in the Zohar – mistakes made by Moshe DeLeon. But the Bais Yosef did not know that Moshe DeLeon wrote the Zohar. He thought – incorrectly – that the Rashbi wrote it 1200 years before that.

Forced to say either that 1) the Rashbi did not know what he was talking about or, 2) the Tanach had changed since that time, or 3) some other explanation, the Bais Yosef wnet with number 3.

That is not justification for claiming that the Rebbe's mistakes in citing pesukim and sources are not actually errors.

[edd]

“The Bais Yosef needs to explain obvious mistakes in the Zohar – mistakes made by Moshe DeLeon. But the Bais Yosef did not know that Moshe DeLeon wrote the Zohar. He thought – incorrectly – that the Rashbi wrote it 1200 years before that”

Is that what you believe?
The Rama was wrong too? Arizal? Ball shem tov? Ramchal? Should we go on to all the jewish leaders which bring proof it was from the Rashbi?

[Shmarya]

No serious person believes the Zohar is the work of the Rashbi.

It is very clear that it is not, and we have enough clear evidence now to say that. The Bais Yosef did not have that evidence.

Even Chabad Rabbi Moshe Miller's Zohar translation says that much of the Zohar is post-Rashbi.

[edd]

בשנת תש"א יצא לאור בירושלים ספר בשם: Major Trends in Jewish Mysticism מאת פרופ' ג' שלום, בו מברר באריכות שאלת הזוהר ומחברו ודעתו עם אלה המייחסים אותו לר' משה די ליאון ולא עם אלה שמקדימים אותו.

גם לדעת תלמידו י' תשבי בספרו "משנת הזוהר", שהופיע בירושלים בשנת תש"ט נתחברו החלקים העיקריים של הזוהר על ידי ר' משה די ליאון ואין בספר שום חלק שקדם לו. ובמבוא לספרו הוא מחליט, שיש לראות במסקנת רבו "חתימת המחלוקת הגדולה על חיבור הזוהר ומחברו, שנמשכה דורות רבים במדע היהדות".

הרבה שנים חיכיתי, שיעמוד מי מחכמי ישראל הנאמנים ויטפל בשאלה זו, ברם לשווא חיכיתי. כשאני לעצמי יש תחת ידי בכתב יד חומר לספר "מדרשי חז"ל והזוהר", בו דנתי על מאות מאמרי הזוהר שהבאתי בי"ז כרכי "תורה שלמה" על פי השוואות עם מדרשי חז"ל, בייחוד עמדתי שם על מאמרי חז"ל המובאים בראשונים ואינם במדרשי חז"ל שלפנינו ושייכים לספרות הזוהר ומדרש הנעלם. ר' דוד לוריא בספרו "קדמות ספר הזוהר", ענף שני, הביא מספר מאמרים כאלה להוכיח קדמות הזוהר ואני המשכתי בהבאות כאלו ובעיקר הראיתי על מדרשים וספרי קדמונים שנתגלו מכתבי יד בתקופות האחרונות. כן אני דן שם על הרבה שאלות וחקירות על הזוהר ועל היחס שבין הזוהר וספרי ר"מ די ליאון. וכיון שמרוב טרדותיי אינני פנוי עכשיו לסדר את כל החומר שנצטבר אצלי אמרתי: כדאי לעמוד, לכל הפחות, על נקודות אחדות בנושא חשוב זה.

ראשית כל, עלי להעיר שלאחר שעברתי בעיון על ספריהם של שלום ותשבי על המקורות שעליהם בנו השקפתם, מוצא אני שמאותם המקורות יש להכריע ממש להפך מדבריהם, שהרי נתברר לנו כעת מתוך ספריו הנדפסים של ר"מ די ליאון "הנפש והחכמה" ו"שקל הקודש" ובייחוד מתוך שני ספריו, שהם עדיין בכתב יד, ספר "הרמון" ו"משכן העדות", שאין שום ספק, שר"מ די ליאון לא חיבר את הזוהר, אלא השתמש הרבה בכתבי יד של הזוהר שלפניו ותירגם הרבה קטעים לעברית. בפרקים שלהלן אברר, ששלום ותשבי שגו ביסודות שעליהם בנו השקפתם בהשוואת ספרי ר' משה די ליאון אל הזוהר. ובדרך כלל כל הקורא בעיון בספרי ר' משה די ליאון ייווכח, שסגנונו, דרכי הבעה שלו, ביטויו, תיאור הנושאים ואופני ההסברה וההרצאה של ר"מ די ליאון רחוקים מדרכו של הזוהר כרחוק מזרח ממערב. אין היד שכתבה ספרים אלה מוכשרת ואינה מסוגלת לכתוב, לא רק את אלף ושבע מאות העמודים הנדפסים של הזוהר, אלא אפילו פרק אחד של הארמית המקורית והחיה שבזוהר.

הזוהר הוא יצירה ענקית מיוחדת במינה. סגולה נפלאה יש לו לספר זה לעורר ולהלהיב את בני אדם לקדושה עילאית. זהו ספר המדבר ללב האדם והילכך אהוב הוא ונערץ כל כך בכל הדורות אצל יראים ושלמים. ואין לו דמיון כלל לספרי ר' משה די ליאון, שהם ספרים רגילים, כמו שאר ספרים שנתחברו באותה תקופה במקצוע זה.

את האמת אגיד, שאיני יכול להבין מהלך מחשבתם של שני המחברים הנזכרים, לאחר ששלום עצמו כותב, שאנו מוכרחים להודות, שיש חלק גדול בזוהר, שהארמית שבו מצוינת ונשנית מפי חכמים, שהלשון הארמית חיה בפיהם. וגם תשבי כותב, שיש לו לזוהר סגולות ספרותיות מיוחדות פאתוס נשגב ונמלץ, לשון פיוטית ציורית, יצירה חיה ומגוונת וכו' וכו', הרי נשאלת השאלה: כלום אפשר למצוא אפילו אחת מכל אלו המעלות בספרי ר' משה די ליאון? וכיצד אפשר למצוא אפילו אחת מכל אלו המעלות בספרי ר' משה די ליאון? וכיצד אפשר תוך כדי כתיבה לשכוח הכל ולכתוב שכבר נפתר באופן מוחלט, שר' משה די ליאון חיבר את הזוהר ואין בספר שום חלק שקדם לו?
הרב מנחם מ. כשר

There is no one who wants to defend Menachem Mendel Kasher on this site?

[Edd]

http://www.daat.ac.il/daat/kitveyet/sinay/hazohar-2.htm

[Shmarya]

But things that the Rebbe told us TO DO, or proclamations the Rebbemade, etc. is a diff. story. Moshe Rabbeinu never made such mistakes,great Tzaddikim never made such mistakes, and neither did the Rebbe.

Great tzaddikim told Jews to stay in Europe, that WW2 would not happen, etc. You can see many specific examples of theis in Eim Habanim Semaicha by Rabbi Teichtal (whose son, I think, later became Chabad).

The Rayyatz (6th Lubavitch rebbe) very specifically in writing told people that there would NOT be a war and that Europe was safe. The war started three months later and his yeshiva was bombed.

[Edd]

Are we Rehashing all the dirt you have stored in your pants?

[Shmarya]

Kasher is attacking Scholem. But there has been a lot of work done since that time. That work supports Scholem's findings and proves Kasher wrong.

[edd]

Get a life!

"No serious person believes the Zohar is the work of the Rashbi"

I gave you one, so pipe down already!

[Edd]

Kasher is attacking Scholem. But there has been a lot of work done since that time. That work supports Scholem's findings and proves Kasher wrong.

Source?

[Edd]

Shamrya we are going to get to the point where you don’t believe in G-d, so get on with it!

[Shmarya]

Normative academic study, Edd. There are dozens of scholarly works on this topic. None support Kasher.

As for the Rayyatz, I see you do not know how to deal with fact.

[edd]

Source! I want a source!
And if you read Kashers statement you would see that you can not argue with it unless you know more than he does about writing styles and such!
What about the Rayatz? Please avi and people on this board discussed it with you already don’t pull me in to your garbage bin please!

[Edd]

Simple reply would be that he could and would avert the war, but it was god’s will.
Example would be Moses saying he was going to go into Israel, something happened which I don’t think we have (you don’t even have the soul) the mind to understand.

[Shmarya]

Source! I want a source!

See any of the dozens of works dealing with this from Tishby and others.

As for "writing styles," again, Kasher was simply WRONG and has been PROVED wrong.

And he was never taken seriously by academics (many of whom are frum, BTW) because of his methodology.

[Shmarya]

Simple reply would be that he could and would avert the war, but it was god’s will.
Example would be Moses saying he was going to go into Israel, something happened which I don’t think we have (you don’t even have the soul) the mind to understand

He also said the Va'ad Hatzoloah would fail and would not save Jews, and he told people NOT to help the Va'ad HaTzoloah, yet it saved many thousands of Jews. The Rayyatz basically saved nobody.

Must be "God's will," eh?

[Shmarya]

"Simple reply would be that he could and would avert the war, but it was god’s will.
Example would be Moses saying he was going to go into Israel, something happened which I don’t think we have (you don’t even have the soul) the mind to understand."

Lots of people died because the Rayyatz was wrong, Edd. No one died becuase Moshe thought he would make it into Israel.

[Edd]

I don't take you seriously either.

[Edd]

Why don't you post all the people who replied to you on these topics?
Do you want me to cut and paste from your archives?
you know i know people replied to you regarding these topics, are you just trying to save face?
What is your motive here? to switch to every conversation as soon as your proven wrong? Look up at the comments here every time you were proven wrong you brought in a whole new topic. Anyway ill cut and paste if it makes you happy.

[Shmarya]

Actually, Edd, replies are not refutations of fact. The Rayyatz failed. He said no war, come to Europe to study, your kids will be safe. Don't leave for America or Israel, you will be safe here in Warsaw. And then, less than 3 months later, WW2 and the Holocaust.

He fought the Va'ad Hatzaloah, told people not to fund them, said they would never save Jews. The VH saved thousands of Jews. The Rayyatz? Basically none.

The Rayyatz started a Pidyon Shvuyim drive, said it was to save Jews in from Hitler. He used most of the money he raised to open his yeshiva in 770.

Spin it any way you want – the man was wrong. He was a failure. And he was a thief.

[Edd]

All said-the Rebbe did some kind of engineering work connecting to the anti-German war effort-that may well be more than any other rabbi at the time-and makes Shmaryas point fairly mute.
Shmaryas quibble is with historic Judaism-it never did display much "heart" for Jews caught up in anti-semitic slaughters-it always blamed these events on Jews sins-rabbi's rarely bothered doing anything in protest of these events-why would they. They usually served to strengthen victims faith in Judaism and jewish-chauvinism-as has the holocaust. These persecution were "in Judaism interest".

Posted by: Stev

[Edd]

All said-the Rebbe did some kind of engineering work connecting to the anti-German war effort-that may well be more than any other rabbi at the time-and makes Shmaryas point fairly mute.
Shmaryas quibble is with historic Judaism-it never did display much "heart" for Jews caught up in anti-semitic slaughters-it always blamed these events on Jews sins-rabbi's rarely bothered doing anything in protest of these events-why would they. They usually served to strengthen victims faith in Judaism and jewish-chauvinism-as has the holocaust. These persecution were "in Judaism interest".

Posted by: Steve

[Edd]

Rabbi Zalman Schneerson, in shlichus of The Rayatz in France in the 30's and 40's virtually moved mountains in efforts to recue children and Yeshivah Bochurim during the war. There are still many witnesses that can attest to that. The person finding fault with Lubavitch for not helping Jews during the Holocaust is not only misinformed, the vitriolic and hateful bend spewing from his comments i.e. using the unfortunate circumstances of the Rebbe's brother etc. show that there is an underlying motive involved. Lubavitch most probably did him a favor along the way.

Posted by: Maishe

[Shmarya]

Zalman Schneerson worked alone. The Rayyatz had nothing to do with it.

Further, the issue is what the RAYYATZ did in Warsaw and New York. As I noted above, he did little good and a lot bad.

[Edd]

Whatever the case may be, I am saddened by this website, I am drawn to look at it like a person looks at a car accident or a train wreck or another disaster. I am saddened that a friend of mine feels such pain and hurt that he uses his energies to look for negative things to write about Lubavitch and the Rebbe. He reacts to a letter that he never received, and puts himself into a position that no one else would want to be in.

Posted by: Dovid

I going to end of with that.
I think it was the best statement i saw on the site, the poetry behind it is astonishing. good day shamrya see ya!

[Shmarya]

All said-the Rebbe did some kind of engineering work connecting to the anti-German war effort-that may well be more than any other rabbi at the time-and makes Shmaryas point fairly mute.

The Rebbe (note: we were discussing his father-in-law, the Rayyatz)was a low-level engineer at the Brooklyn Naval Yard. He did not work for the government. He worked for a private contractor.

Did his work help? Sure. But that does not make up for stealing money menat for rescue and using it to open a yeshiva and the rest of the crap the Rayyatz did.

[avi]

Folks,
The topic was interesting.

But, I see that we're now back in the "Shmarya Twilight Zone" where you enter and never leave.

Shmarya, it is remotely possible for you to get back on track?

Regards,

Avi