The "Heresy" of Chabad
Joel Shurkin
my blog:
Enjoy. I will be hiding under the table for a while. Pretend you don't
know me.
Here's the opening. (Fortunately, I own the copyright.)
-0-
No one talks about it in public. The Jewish press tries to ignore it.
Most Orthodox Jews probably wish it would go away. But, in a dispute
virtually unprecedented in 500 years, a major and well-known movement in
traditional Judaism either is or is not guilty of heresy, a sin that
usually brought excommunication.
In Baltimore, the head of Ner Israel, one of American Orthodoxy’s most
prominent yeshivas, has declared that some members of the Chasidic
Lubavitch (Chabad) movement can no longer be counted for a minyan, give
testimony, act as ritual slaughterers or determine the kashrus of food
because they are apikoros (unbelievers).
In New York, a prominent Orthodox scholar has fought a lonely, public
battle against Chabad and has earned petulant silence for his efforts.
Others who have stood up against Chabad have been vilified and attacked,
and the whole Orthodox community seems to think any public discussion is
bad for the Jews.
It will not, however, go away.
j
Henry Goodman
"Joel Shurkin" <shu...@mac.com> wrote in message
news:d19mi2$o09$1...@falcon.steinthal.us...
-0-
j
Send it to the London Jewish Chronicle. They would love it.
--
Henry Goodman
henry dot goodman at virgin dot net
Joel Shurkin
j
Nick
I went with my father to his local shul some years ago, and we were invited
to kiddush by the local Lubavitch rabbi, who regularly attends the shul and
greets everyone as they come in.
When we got to his house, he was not at all in a hurry to make kiddush, but
rather gave us some kind of quiz on the identities of the rabbis and
rebbetzin possibly in pictures on display.
This had not featured on my father's fairly religious upbringing and we
failed miserably.
Nick
Yisroel Markov
<shu...@mac.com> said:
>The story the Baltimore Jewish Times wouldn't print is now available on=20
>my blog:
Just a few things:
It's mitnagedim, not mitnegadim.
>Chabad services regularly include the prayer, the Yehi, in which they pray to
>“our Master, the King Messiah” in honor of the Rebbe.
The Yehi is not a prayer to anyone. Nor it is "in honor of the Rebbe"
- it is directly about him. "Long live our master, etc." It's why
Lubavitchers are fond of M'lakhim I 1:31, where Bat Sheva utters a
similar statement.
>Some Lubavitchers now believe that the late rabbi has so subsumed his human
>essence to God that he is now pure divinity, the godhead. They add the word borainu
>(our Creator) to the Yehi prayer. God.
Which God? :-)
Seriously, though, there are plenty of Lubavitchers who agree with the
"essence" idea (and have come up with some amusing permutations), but
think that "boreiniks" are nuts.
>The Central Committee of Chabad Lubavitch, caught in the middle, also issued a statement.
That statement is apparently the work of R' Yehuda Krinsky. An awful
lot of Lubavitchers want him dismissed from his position at Agudat
Hasidei Habad, in part for such statements. I think this:
>The statement, however, may very well represent a minority opinion within Chabad
is correct.
Yisroel "Godwrestler Warriorson" Markov - Boston, MA Member
www.reason.com -- for unbiased analysis of the world DNRC
--------------------------------------------------------------------
"Judge, and be prepared to be judged" -- Ayn Rand
yaakov_...@hotmail.com
> In New York, a prominent Orthodox scholar has fought a lonely, public
> battle against Chabad and has earned petulant silence for his
efforts.
> Others who have stood up against Chabad have been vilified and
attacked,
> and the whole Orthodox community seems to think any public discussion
is
> bad for the Jews.
>
> It will not, however, go away.
>
> j
I am do not have much day-to-day contact with Habadnikim and I am not
really familiar with the ins and outs of this controversy, but it is
important to remember a couple of points. Firstly, none of the
Habad factions have advocated abandoning Torah and mitzvot, the
way Shabtai Zvi did. All Jewish groups that developed ideologies
or philosophies contrary to the basic beliefs of the Torah have
either morphed into things like Christianity, or more or less
disappeared
such as the Shabbateans, Karaites, Frankists, Tzedukim (Sadducees),
etc.
Secondly, NO ONE WANTS WITCH HUNTS! These people like Prof. Berger who
are obsessed with this problem seem to want everyone identified with
Habad to undergo some sort of inquisition to see if they are "fit" to
be part of the mainstream Jewish community, to serve as teachers,
rabbis, mashgihim, etc. I am not saying there isn't a problem, but
I don't know how much can be done. My feeling is that if they really
go "off the derech (path)", they will end up diappearing, so the
problem will solve itself. The religious community in Israel is under
unprecendented attack by anti-religious elements determined to drive
them out of the mainstream Israeli consensus (the plan of Sharon/Lapid/
Peres to bulldoze dozens of religious communities including synagogues,
yeshivot, mikvaot leaves many of these types drooling) and so no one
has the stomach to start a civil war, just as the advent of the anti-
religious parts of the haskalah put an end to the wars between the
Hasidim and Mitnagdim in the early 19th century.
Joel Shurkin
> On Wed, 16 Mar 2005 16:23:30 +0000 (UTC), Joel Shurkin
> <shu...@mac.com> said:
>
>
>>The story the Baltimore Jewish Times wouldn't print is now available on=20
>>my blog:
>
>
> Just a few things:
>
> It's mitnagedim, not mitnegadim.
I've seen it spelled both ways. Does it matter? One of the joys of blogs
is things are easily fixed. Someone pointed out the Rebbe is actually
buried in Queens, not Brooklyn and it took me about a minute to post the
changes
>
>
>>Chabad services regularly include the prayer, the Yehi, in which they pray to
>>“our Master, the King Messiah” in honor of the Rebbe.
>
>
> The Yehi is not a prayer to anyone. Nor it is "in honor of the Rebbe"
> - it is directly about him. "Long live our master, etc." It's why
> Lubavitchers are fond of M'lakhim I 1:31, where Bat Sheva utters a
> similar statement.
Let me go back and look at that. Thanks.
"MIDIcian" (tm)
Stan
+- +- +- +-
"Joel Shurkin" <shu...@mac.com> wrote in message
news:d19mi2$o09$1...@falcon.steinthal.us...
yaco...@aol.com
Joel Shurkin wrote:
> Yisroel Markov wrote:
> > It's mitnagedim, not mitnegadim.
>
> I've seen it spelled both ways. Does it matter?
Sure. "Mitnagedim" are those who oppose, which is what you mean to
say, I believe.
Minegadim are those who self flagellate, assuming the Aramaic usage of
neghad is morphed here to a Hebrew verb, made reflexive in the
hitpa'el.
Jacko
Der Aibishter© Onan Ben Drusoy MD
news:1111017148....@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
>
> Minegadim are those who self flagellate, assuming the Aramaic usage of
> neghad is morphed here to a Hebrew verb, made reflexive in the
> hitpa'el.
Serious question - from whence the Halabi surname Menaged? Is it in the
sense of nagid (leader, wealthy man) or does it refer to an ascetic who
flagellates himself?
IS using OBD account.
Joel Shurkin
I changed it this morning, thanks.
J
ToooooMuchCoffeeMan
the two paragraphs that begin, "The argument has historic
proportions..."? If you look at the paragraph below that, I think the
paragraph split that separates Berger's name from the "His" in the last
sentence makes it read that it's Shimon Bar-Kokhba who wrote a book in
2001.
That snagged my eye on first reading, and I had a good chuckle.
Joel Shurkin
Yes, so did I and I changed it this morning. I always have problems with
antecedents. That Bar-Kokhba was a hell of a writer.
J
Amdur - Jeffrey I.
: ToooooMuchCoffeeMan wrote:
:> Joel, what an interesting article. May I just point out something about
:> the two paragraphs that begin, "The argument has historic
Excellent article, and source of shul conversatgion tomorrow!. I've
always wondered why those Lubavichers who think Schneersohn is the Messiah
are considered to be any more Jewish than those "(Ex-)Jews for Jesus" that
roam the streets pretending to be Jewish.
--
*********************************************************
Jeff Amdur
Quality foreign language instruction since 1971 (Oy, gevalt! Still?)
Quality timekeeping for various sports since 1973
Amitai
"nagid" in the sense of ruler, hence leader, hence wealthy man,
is biblical Hebrew.
1st Samuel 9:16 - " ... umesha`hto le-nagid `al `am yisrael"
(... and thou shalt anoint him to be prince over My pepole Israel).
In the Talmud, the root "nun-gimel-dalet" in a variety of
grammatical forms refers to lashing, particularly as judicial
punishment.
Berakhot 55a: "`halma bisha kasheh mi-nigda" (A bad dream is
worse than a lashing).
Ta`anit 24a: "hahu gavra dei`hayav nigda bevei-dina de Rava"
(That man who was sentenced to a lashing in Rava's court).
Yebamot 52a: "Rav mangid man de-meqadesh bebiah" (Rav sentences
to a lashing anyone who betrothes [a woman] by intercourse).
Ketubot 28a: "Nigudei nami menagdinan lehu" (They are lashed as
well [as being excommunicated].)
Amitai
Eliyahu Rooff
"Amdur - Jeffrey I." <jia...@marple.umd.edu> wrote in message
news:d1g0eq$h2r$2...@grapevine.wam.umd.edu...
> Joel Shurkin <shu...@mac.com> wrote:
> : ToooooMuchCoffeeMan wrote:
> :> Joel, what an interesting article. May I just point out something
> about
> :> the two paragraphs that begin, "The argument has historic
>
> Excellent article, and source of shul conversatgion tomorrow!. I've
> always wondered why those Lubavichers who think Schneersohn is the
> Messiah
> are considered to be any more Jewish than those "(Ex-)Jews for Jesus"
> that
> roam the streets pretending to be Jewish.
>
affiliation, belief or practice. It's either ancestry or conversion, and
once you're in, you're Jewish for life. If J4J's were Jewish when they
joined, they're still Jewish when they come to their senses and leave.
Moshiachists may be heretics, but they're Jewish heretics nonetheless.
Eliyahu
Der Aibishter© Onan Ben Drusoy MD
"Amitai" <chr...@techunix.technion.ac.il> wrote in message
"nagid" in the sense of ruler, hence leader, hence wealthy man,
is biblical Hebrew.
So where do we get Menaged as a surname - or is it not Hebrew but somehow
derived from Arabic and then pronounced with a hard G instead of a soft G in
English?
IS using OBD account.
yaco...@aol.com
Amdur - Jeffrey I. wrote:
> Joel Shurkin <shu...@mac.com> wrote:
> : ToooooMuchCoffeeMan wrote:
> :> Joel, what an interesting article. May I just point out something
about
> :> the two paragraphs that begin, "The argument has historic
>
> Excellent article, and source of shul conversatgion tomorrow!. I've
> always wondered why those Lubavichers who think Schneersohn is the
Messiah
> are considered to be any more Jewish than those "(Ex-)Jews for Jesus"
that
> roam the streets pretending to be Jewish.
>
Because belief in a a false messiah is not at all forbidden in Judaism?
Jews for Yeshu claim he is a deity. Or a portion of a larger deity.
Or a third of a deity.
That is foreign worship, folks!
Jacko
Amitai
I can only guess. The term got into mishnaic Hebrew, evidently
from the Aramaic.
For example, in Yebamot 63a there is a play on words derived
from "nun-gimel-dalet. The drash is on Genesis Genesis 2:18:
"e'eseh lo `ezer ke-negdo" (I will make a fitting helper for him).
Here "ke-neged" is understood to mean matching or fitting, in the
sense of making a pair.
There are two versions to the drash. The more familiar one is:
"zakhah - ezer, lo zakhah - ke-negdo" (If he is lucky [in his
choice of a wife] she is a helper; if not, she opposes him).
The second version is: "zakhah - ke-negdo, lo zakhah - menagedeto"
(If he is lucky she is fitting. if not, she beats him). If this
is where the surname came from, it can be anglicized to Lasher,
a not uncommon family name.
In any case, the G is hard.
Amitai
Jose R. Nebro
> about
> > :> the two paragraphs that begin, "The argument has historic
> >
> > Excellent article, and source of shul conversatgion tomorrow!. I've
> > always wondered why those Lubavichers who think Schneersohn is the
> Messiah
> > are considered to be any more Jewish than those "(Ex-)Jews for Jesus"
> that
> > roam the streets pretending to be Jewish.
> >
> > Jeff Amdur
>
>
> Because belief in a a false messiah is not at all forbidden in Judaism?
>
> Jews for Yeshu claim he is a deity. Or a portion of a larger deity.
> Or a third of a deity.
>
> That is foreign worship, folks!
>
> Jacko
So do these Lubavichers, as some claim the rebbe to be G-d or a part of the
Deity.
So I do thinl that they have deviated from Judaism and therefore they should
be considered like the Jews for Jesus.
Jose R. Nebro
> > :> Joel, what an interesting article. May I just point out something
> > about
> > :> the two paragraphs that begin, "The argument has historic
> >
> > Excellent article, and source of shul conversatgion tomorrow!. I've
> > always wondered why those Lubavichers who think Schneersohn is the
> > Messiah
> > are considered to be any more Jewish than those "(Ex-)Jews for Jesus"
> > that
> > roam the streets pretending to be Jewish.
> >
> Being Jewish, as you know (or should know), isn't a matter of
> affiliation, belief or practice. It's either ancestry or conversion, and
> once you're in, you're Jewish for life. If J4J's were Jewish when they
> joined, they're still Jewish when they come to their senses and leave.
> Moshiachists may be heretics, but they're Jewish heretics nonetheless.
>
> Eliyahu
>
you and the other (and more important) religious. This is the one which
they the Lubavichers have deviated from and it is in this light that they
should not be Jewish any longer. You can't be Jewish if you believe that
Jesus is the Moshia and divine. In the same manner you can't be Jewish and
believe the Rebe to be the Moshia and divine.
yaco...@aol.com
Jose R. Nebro wrote:
> > Because belief in a a false messiah is not at all forbidden in
Judaism?
> >
> > Jews for Yeshu claim he is a deity. Or a portion of a larger
deity.
> > Or a third of a deity.
> >
> > That is foreign worship, folks!
> >
> > Jacko
>
> So do these Lubavichers, as some claim the rebbe to be G-d or a part
of the
> Deity.
That is a self contradiction. "These Lubavitchers" ***some*** of whom
...
> So I do thinl that they have deviated from Judaism and therefore they
should
> be considered like the Jews for Jesus.
Then you and your bet din should go ahead and put them in herem. Make
a hakhraza then. But you had better be sure. Hevvu methunim baddin!
Jacko
cindys
"Amdur - Jeffrey I." <jia...@marple.umd.edu> wrote in message
news:d1g0eq$h2r$2...@grapevine.wam.umd.edu...
> : ToooooMuchCoffeeMan wrote:
> :> Joel, what an interesting article. May I just point out something about
> :> the two paragraphs that begin, "The argument has historic
>
> Excellent article, and source of shul conversatgion tomorrow!. I've
> always wondered why those Lubavichers who think Schneersohn is the Messiah
> are considered to be any more Jewish than those "(Ex-)Jews for Jesus" that
> roam the streets pretending to be Jewish.
>
For the record, a large percentage of the J4J are not Jewish. They are
evangelical Baptist missionaries who are carefully coached to pretend to be
Jewish to snare Jews from a weak Judaic background. That having been said, I
would be willing to bet that fewer than 10% of the members of so-called
*messianic synagogues* (sic) would be considered Jewish in accordance with
the definition of "who is a Jew" according to halacha. Additionally, one of
the posters to another newsgroup made the interesting observation, that a
lot of gentile Christians join *messianic synagogues* because they want to
follow a religion which they perceive is closer to the way Jesus lived. This
is not something that the missionaries were counting on at all -- gentile
Christians wanting to follow what they think is Judaism.
Best regards,
---Cindy S.
Y'hudah ha-Kofer ha-Gadol
news:d1g0eq$h2r$2...@grapevine.wam.umd.edu...
>
> always wondered why those Lubavichers who think Schneersohn is the Messiah
> are considered to be any more Jewish than those "(Ex-)Jews for Jesus" that
> roam the streets pretending to be Jewish.
What?!? Are you seriously trying to compare Lubavitcher post-mortem
Moshichism with Notsri post-mortem Moshiachism? They're not at all alike!
There is a world of difference between the two, and only one who is
ill-informed on the subject will fail to see such glaring differences. I bet
you're also one of these types who also mistakenly claims that the belief
that the Rebbe was HaSh-m is no different from Xian theology which claims J
was divine. But the theology is not even remotely similar, not on the issue
of requirements for being Moshiach or the issue of the relationship between
Moshiach and HaSh-m. This is pure meshugas and apikorsus. But let me clear
this misconception up for you.
Here is what Lubavitchers believe:
http://oopi.us/pictures/mashiach-schneerson.jpg
Here is what Xians believe:
http://oopi.us/pictures/mashiach-jesus.jpg
As you can see, they are totally different; there is no connection at all. I
hope you've learned your lesson.
By the way, I'd like to take this opportunity to sell you a nice picture of
the Rebbe and then daven at your local schul (for a small fee of course)...