Petitions, Acceptance and Moshiach
Eli Cohen
On 31 Jan 1995, Momabee wrote:
> Eli Cohen <ech...@amanda.dorsai.org> wrote:
>
> :In 1950 the Rebbe took great pains to stress that "Yaakov did not die."
>
> Momabee> Yes, metaphorically, but not via the actual living Rabbi
> Schneerson.
>
>.....
> What bothers many of us is the qabbalistic noninitiate's tendency to
> literalize the metaphoric.
> ........ Clearly, as many noninitiates to the world of Midrash are
> continually wondering whether the events therein described *really*
> (=literally) happened, and feeling a crisis in being unable to reconcile
> them with physical reality, many Lubavitch hasidim literally believe their
> Rebbe to be still leading them and quite possibly about to reincarnate and
> save the world.
>......
> Aaron Haleva
>
>
I'm happy you raised this. Indeed in the several discussions in the
Rebbe's teachings on this particular statement from the Talmud, the Rebbe
took several different approaches.
In the most recent discussion the Rebbe draws the distinction between the
stark physical and gross material world, where indeed the Egyptian
population saw what happened and saw it as death, and the G-dly reality
of the physical (not just spiritual) world where the life of Yaakov
continues. This clearly goes beyond the more metaphoric levels of
understanding which you correctly portrayed.
This translates in a slightly earlier discussion to the soul not entirely
leaving the body though it has ceased to act through the body.
The Rebbe in his physical lifetime was clearly not a being of this world,
defying its logic and playing with its rules at will. His life as of all
great Tsadikim was sustained by love and fear of G-d and not in the way
of yours and mine.
The practical result of this more literal reading of Yaakov Avinu Lo Mes
is to be seen in the inumerable personal accounts of those who have
turned to him to intercede for them in the last 8 months by reading a
note at his grave or in his room or placing one in one of his holy works.
They (numbering in the thousands can all attest to the physical fact that
the Rebbe continues to operate in this physical world.
By the way this revelation of G-dly reality in the physical world is
exactly what Moshiach is all about.
Moshe Shulman
>> >are breached by opining that Tchiyas Hameisim may yield the Moshiach.
>> >He needs to do this because if he does not, then he cannot call them
>> >Kofrim---he must call them Toyim. He would appreciate the difference, I trust.
>> Not really. If I say "X is the Moshiach", and X is dead. Since a dead person
>> cannot be Moshiach I no longer believe in Moshiach. Hence I am a kofer. Were X
>> to be alive, I do not think that there would be a difference if he were not the
>> Moshiach. In this case only if the person said, "It seems that of the living
>> people X is the most likely, but I could be wrong" would the person be a toah
>> if X was to die.
>This is getting repetetive:
>In 1950 the Rebbe took great pains to stress that "Yaakov did not die."
>father-in-laws leadership was still in effect. (Even after he accepted he
>still only considered himself an extension of his predecessor.)
>Applying the Rebbe's teachings of then to now, the leadership of the
>Rebbe is still in force.
Eli, you do not understand what is meant by Yakov avinu lo mes. 1. I will ask you
simply if the Rebbe must be ressurected, then it is not an error to say that he is
dead, correct? (If not explain how a living person has to be ressurected). 2. Based
on 1, the Rebbe is not the LIVING candidate for Moshiach. Do you believe that there
is now a living candidate? (If not why have youchanged your belief from before gimel
Tammuz to after gimel Tammuz?)
Momabee
:In the most recent discussion the Rebbe draws the distinction between the
:stark physical and gross material world, where indeed the Egyptian
:population saw what happened and saw it as death, and the G-dly reality
:of the physical (not just spiritual) world where the life of Yaakov
:continues. This clearly goes beyond the more metaphoric levels of
:understanding which you correctly portrayed.
First of all, I'm sorry, but I do not follow the meaning of Godly reality,
etc. I do not subscribe to any Augustinian type split of the
world/universe into good or bad, one Godly, one absent of God. The
traditional doxology states "Melo Khol Ha'ares Kebhodo" God's *presence*
is everywhere. I believe, from my point of view, and hus mikebhodakh,
"this" actually tries to reliteralize the metaphor. Precisely the problem
with mysticism in the West.
:This translates in a slightly earlier discussion to the soul not entirely
:leaving the body though it has ceased to act through the body.
:The Rebbe in his physical lifetime was clearly not a being of this world,
:defying its logic and playing with its rules at will. His life as of all
:great Tsadikim was sustained by love and fear of G-d and not in the way
:of yours and mine.
The talmudic/midrashic traditional view, as I see things, is that the
*soul* feels unhindered after death, and thus only those somewhat timid
about carrying through with the transformation will seek to perpetuate
their former mode of existence. As far as whether the Rebbe was or was
not a "being of this world", I again find the underlying semantic
orientation of all of these ideas to be the old (Platonic-Aristotelian)
physical/spiritual dualism which the Judaism I know does not subscribe to.
The inner world is not physically spiritual; there is no spiritual
materialism.
:The practical result of this more literal reading of Yaakov Avinu Lo Mes
:is to be seen in the inumerable personal accounts of those who have
:turned to him to intercede for them in the last 8 months by reading a
:note at his grave or in his room or placing one in one of his holy works.
:They (numbering in the thousands can all attest to the physical fact that
the :Rebbe continues to operate in this physical world.
God operates in the *physical* world as well, as I see it, yet he is not
*physical*; if there is no dualism, no ideal world of spiritual entities,
the world is one, interrelated in various ways. A prophet does not leave
this world and enter another in the literal, or external, sense of
"leaving" "entering" and "world", yet he undergoes a certain experience.
A close reading of Iyobh (Job) shows that prophecy was perceived as
opening your ears to something that was always there (not in some "other"
external world). Whether a deceased man can intervene on someone's behalf
is unknown to me. Whether Judaism likes such mediation is quite another
matter. Certainly Xtianity does like this type of mediation. I leave it
at that.
:By the way this revelation of G-dly reality in the physical world is
:exactly what Moshiach is all about.
I am sorry, but again I hear the Xtian orientation coming through. No.
Mashiah is about the political resurrection of the Jewish Nation and the
Davidic dynasty. Whatever *Godly reality* is or is not, we already had
the one and only revelation. Mashiah is a chance to remember it better,
if you will, as can only truly be done at the national level with the
reinstitution of the misvoth impossible to perform outside the Land of
Israel, without the Temple and Sanhedrin.
Aaron Haleva
Isaac Balbin
>our generation. There were those who could learn more then he could (The
>Klausenberger comes to mind).
I do not know how Moshe Shulman can make this statement, not because I
disagree ... I don't have any yardstick or knowledge of the Klausenberger.
I would appreciate it if he described the method through which he
came to his learned conclusion.
Moshe Shulman
Balbin) writes:
1. Breadth of knowledge in ALL areas of Torah. That means familiarity with
EVERYTHING. Talmud, Rishonim, Achronim, Kabbalah, and ALL types of Chasidic
works.
2. Experience and abilities as a Rov and Posek.
An objective comparison between the talks and writings of the Klausenberger
(or the old Satmer Rov) would show the clear differences. (Whether you agree
with it or not, take a look at the sources used in the Satmer Rov's VeYoel
Moshe, and compare the breadth of them to what is used in Lekutei Sichos or
any other work by the Rebbe, especially those dealing with halacha).
Moshe Shulman
>
>Isaac Balbin (is...@goanna.cs.rmit.edu.au) wrote:
>I am surprised he decided to take the route "mine is bigger than yours"
>instead of focusing on the issue.
PSST. He's not mine. My Rebbes taught me to speak the truth. I was also taught
that it doesn't make my Rebbe any smaller to see greatness in another Rebbe.
>I already said too much ;-)
Yes, unfortuinatly you have (AGAIN)
Eli Cohen
On 2 Feb 1995, Moshe Shulman wrote:
> In <3gma33$7...@newsbf02.news.aol.com> mom...@aol.com (Momabee) writes:
>
> >
> >Eli Cohen <ech...@amanda.dorsai.org> wrote:
> >
I hop you caught my response to Momabee which applies also to your
immediately prior posting. If not I can resend
Isaac Balbin
>1. Breadth of knowledge in ALL areas of Torah. That means familiarity with
>EVERYTHING. Talmud, Rishonim, Achronim, Kabbalah, and ALL types of Chasidic
>works.
Is Moshe Shulman telling us that the Lubavitcher Rebbe wasn't familiar
with the above?
>2. Experience and abilities as a Rov and Posek.
Excuse me. This is not valid. The Lubavitcher Rebbe often said he was
not a Posek, and directed people to Poskim. Does this imply that the
Lubavitcher Beis Din was more erudite than he? What nonsense.
>An objective comparison between the talks and writings of the Klausenberger
>(or the old Satmer Rov) would show the clear differences. (Whether you agree
>with it or not, take a look at the sources used in the Satmer Rov's VeYoel
>Moshe, and compare the breadth of them to what is used in Lekutei Sichos or
>any other work by the Rebbe, especially those dealing with halacha).
Again, this is silly. If you are simply counting sources you would have to
say that Rav Ovadya was many times the Posek that Reb Moshe Feinstein
was.
Frankly, it demeans you to make statements of the above variety.
Even if you are more impressed with V'Yoel Moshe (and this has been
taken apart by many a latter Rabbi with opposing views) it is hardly
scientific to use that as a comparison with Likutei Sichos.
I would argue that such comparisons are unhelpful in general.
Moshe Shulman
writes:
>
>mshu...@ix.netcom.com (Moshe Shulman) writes:
>
>>1. Breadth of knowledge in ALL areas of Torah. That means familiarity with
>>EVERYTHING. Talmud, Rishonim, Achronim, Kabbalah, and ALL types of Chasidic
>>works.
>Is Moshe Shulman telling us that the Lubavitcher Rebbe wasn't familiar
>with the above?
? Did I say that? (although his usage of non-Chabad Chassidus was less then
other Chassidim use Chabad Chassidus). There are degrees of knowledge which is
shown by their writings. You forget, not one of the people mentioned here will
ever be my Rebbe or any Rov that I have had a close relationship to. (That would
be biased and unfair).
>>2. Experience and abilities as a Rov and Posek.
>Excuse me. This is not valid. The Lubavitcher Rebbe often said he was
>not a Posek, and directed people to Poskim. Does this imply that the
>Lubavitcher Beis Din was more erudite than he? What nonsense.
Have you seen any of the discussions of halacha that have come out in the name
of the Rebbe? I suggest you do and then check them and the sources and
methodology used against Reb Moshe, or any great Posek.
>>An objective comparison between the talks and writings of the Klausenberger
>>(or the old Satmer Rov) would show the clear differences. (Whether you agree
>>with it or not, take a look at the sources used in the Satmer Rov's VeYoel
>>Moshe, and compare the breadth of them to what is used in Lekutei Sichos or
>>any other work by the Rebbe, especially those dealing with halacha).
>Again, this is silly. If you are simply counting sources you would have to
>say that Rav Ovadya was many times the Posek that Reb Moshe Feinstein
>was.
We were talking about Chassidic Rebbes, I did not mention the non-Chassidim. Reb
Moshe was not known for his knowledge in Kabbalah and Chassidic works, so
although he was probably one of the greatest poskim in my lifetime, he does not
fit what I have said. Chacham Ovadya (which is the real title he deserves being
a Sefardi) is well known, even to those who do not agree with his poskim as
being a walking encyclopedia. He is probably the greatest living Sefardic Torah
scholar.
>Frankly, it demeans you to make statements of the above variety.
>Even if you are more impressed with V'Yoel Moshe (and this has been
>taken apart by many a latter Rabbi with opposing views) it is hardly
>scientific to use that as a comparison with Likutei Sichos.
>I would argue that such comparisons are unhelpful in general.
Better yet, compare the works in halacha of the Rebbe TZ'L and those of his
grandfather the Tzamach Tzedek and you will see reight away what I mean.
Moshe Shulman
>Frankly, it demeans you to make statements of the above variety.
>Even if you are more impressed with V'Yoel Moshe (and this has been
>taken apart by many a latter Rabbi with opposing views) it is hardly
>scientific to use that as a comparison with Likutei Sichos.
>I would argue that such comparisons are unhelpful in general.
Issac, it seems that you misunderstand my point. I am not saying that
the Rebbe was not Talmud Chocham. It just bothers me to see people
exagerate his greatness, and then try to SELL it to the world. If Yosef
and Eli want to think their Rebbe was the greatest of this generation,
that is their right. I disagree, but that is my right. The point is
crossed when they claim that their Rebbe is the Moshiach of Klal
Yisroel, which means me also. I just saw in a magazine called 'Beis
Moshiach' where they have cards that have the blessings to say 'When you
see the Moshiach, the Rebbe from Lubavitch'. With his picture, and the
blessings to say for a chocham, and king of Israel. (WITH Shem and
Malchus). This is a very serious thing and no joke. Jews have strong
beliefs about Moshiach. It is a fundmental of our faith, and not a joke,
or something to be made light of because of your politics which makes
you feel your Rebbe is the greatest thing that ever happened to the
world. THERE IS NO REBBE THAT I HAVE SEEN OR HEARD OF IN MY LIFETIME WHO
WAS WORTHY OF SHINING THE SHOES OF THE BAAL SHEM TOV. There HAVE been a
number of Rebbes who have been so above the generation that we might
think they could, but that is due to our puny minds and understandings.
Anyone who is familiar with the lives of Rebbes KNOWS that it is
impossible to feel this way. 'If the previous generations were angels
then we are men, but if they are men we are like donkeys and not even
like the donkey of R. Pinchos b. Yair.'. If that was true then, al achas
kama vekama today!!
Moshe Shulman
<ech...@amanda.dorsai.org> writes:
I don't think so. Why not tell me what you said and in reference to which
comment of mine?
Amos Wittenberg
In article <3gpgin$l...@goanna.cs.rmit.edu.au>
is...@goanna.cs.rmit.edu.au "Isaac Balbin" writes:
>I do not know how Moshe Shulman can make this statement, not because I
>disagree ... I don't have any yardstick or knowledge of the Klausenberger.
>I would appreciate it if he described the method through which he
>came to his learned conclusion.
Quite right, Isaac. I was surprised to see that Moshe did fall into the
trap of comparing g'dolim. On the other hand, do we not hear some
Lubavitcher Chassidim demand recognition of their Rebbe tz"l as the
"n'si hador", the "princely leader of the generation"?? If you can
describe *their* method through with *they* came to their conclusion, I
am sure that Moshe will endeavour to describe *his* method to you...
This, IMHO, goes to the heart of the controversy. Not so much what the
*Rebbe zt"l* said is being taken amiss, but the exalted position that
Chaba"dsker chassidim demand for their Rebbe and the way they elevate
him above the rest of us mortals, not only people like you and me (I do
not know about you but I'm no tzaddik :-{ ) but above giants like the
Klausenburger z"tl and the Satmarer z"tl.
I am quite sure that Moshe fell into the trap, not because he is
arrogant enough to make himself the judge between your Rebbe t"zl and
other g'dolim in the `olam ho'emes [the world of truth] and, l'hibbodel
l'chayyim, in this world but, on the contrary, because he is so
concerned that some Chaba"dsker chassidim seem to be doing this...
Shall we leave it to the Ribbono shel `Olom [the Master of the Universe]
to find for Himself the right candidate to become Moshiach and get on
with kiyyum hamitzvos b'ahavoh [fulfilment of the commandments in loving
obedience] and limmud haTorah [Torah learning] and stop claiming things
for our respective spiritual guides which will anyway be made perfectly
clear to us soon when HKB"H will bring the g'uloh sh'leimoh [the
ultimate redemption]?
--
Amos W
... am...@metallia.demon.co.uk ...
Momabee
:Nevertheless certain Tzaddikim are singled
:out as "their death is not recorded." Moshe is one and Yaakov is another.
What do you mean? Both the deaths of Ya'aqob and Mosheh are recorded:
Ya'aqob: Genesis 49:32;
Mosheh: Deutoronomy 34:5;
Both were buried, and had long mourning periods.
Ya'aqob: Genesis 50:3-13;
Mosheh: Deut. 34:6-8;
If you are quoting another Midrash, it may help us if you cite it, quote
it, and then discuss your view of same. From my point of view, the taking
a Midrashic comment as literal destroys the very intent of the Midrash;
the tension created by the Midrash's seemingly untenable assertions is
what challenges the reader to discover the nonliteral direction they point
to. This is a classic Hebraic literary style, (although used in other
parts of the East as well -- cf. the function of the Koan in Zen Bhuddism,
etc.) a dvelopment of the Hidoth described in the Kethubhim.
Thank you,
A. Haleva
A. Haleva
Moshe Shulman
Cohen <ech...@amanda.dorsai.org> writes:
>I wrote about Yaakov our father did not die in another post and hope to
>respond to one of the answers to that soon.
>1. The body clearly needs to be resurrected by Divine intervention.
>2. The Chassam Sofer infers from the fact that a human Moshiach
>can come at any moment that there must be a living candidate. Once
>however we have identified a presumed (Bchezkas) or certain (Bvadai)
>Moshiach, we have no need for a candidate.
>The whole point of the Rebbe's teachings in 5710 was that "Nothing has
>changed"
The Rebbe was only Bchezkas in Lubavitch. That doesn't rate according to
the Torah. BTW will you show me where we see that a person who is
bchezkus Moshiach can die and then return as Moshiach? The Rambam
doesn't say that, nor does the Chasam SOfer (in fact the Sdei Chemed
says clearly that should a candidate die, he is no longer a candidate)
Moshe Shulman
>I have no problem with that assertion. Indeed all Tzadikim are capable of
>intercession on our behalf. Nevertheless certain Tzaddikim are singled
>out as "their death is not recorded." Moshe is one and Yaakov is another.
1. Since you agree that ALL tzaddikim are of such a level, the Rebbe was not
special in that respect. 2. Moshe: Devorim 34:5; Yakov: Ber 49:33, 50:2.
Ignorance in a posek Torah has no excuse.
>For these individuals the connection to and involvement in this world
>remains even more real. The stories surrounding the Rebbe recently
>involve actual material evidence of the answer being received, such as
>family members calling to report answers received in dreams to questions
>they did not know had been asked, or people opening books of the Rebbe's
>letters at random and finding very detailed answers to the circumstances
>of their question replied to someone else years earlier.
As you have admitted that is very common by tzaddikim. Nothing special in it
with regards to the Rebbe.
YOSEF KAZEN
Organization: The Dorsai Embassy - New York
Distribution: world
Moshe Shulman (mshu...@ix.netcom.com) wrote:
: Better yet, compare the works in halacha of the Rebbe TZ'L and those of his
: grandfather the Tzamach Tzedek and you will see reight away what I mean.
Moshe, as a person who claims to be an expert....
You ought to know, the Rebbe never claimed to be a Posek. In a few rare
instances he did provide his guidance to Halacha where it was needed.
What comes to mind is the famous issue on ZIM SHIPPING - an Israeli
company owned by Jews and they tried to get a heter for running their
ships on Shabbos. The Rebbe pointed out that as an engineer in ship building
he knows the ins and outs of what it takes to run the ships and it is
not permissble for a Jew to do this on Shabbos.
YY
bac...@vms.huji.ac.il
Not a *being of this world* ?? This reminds me of the following classic
Jewish joke.
A certain congregation can't stand their rabbi. When another congregation
makes inquiries if he's available, the president of the first congregation
writes a letter of recommendation: "Our rabbi ? He's like Moshe, he's like
Shakespeare, he's like God Himself" ! Well, with a letter of recommendation
like this how can the second congregation go wrong ? So they immediately
fax him a contract. Comes the first Shabbat and the rabbi gives his sermon.
A momumental catastrophe ! A minute after Shabbat, the president of the
congregation fires off an angry letter to the first congregation: "Why did
you lie ?" The answer: "We didn't lie ! Like Moshe he can't speak English;
like Shakespeare he can't speak Hebrew and Yiddish; like God, the Ribono
shel Olam is NISHT A MENTSH, EHR IS OYCHET NISHT A MENTSH"
(translation: God is not a MENTSCH (human being) he too is not a MENTSCH).
A. Engler Anderson
: In <Pine.SUN.3.91.950203...@amanda.dorsai.org> Eli
: Cohen <ech...@amanda.dorsai.org> writes:
: The Rebbe was only Bchezkas in Lubavitch. That doesn't rate according to
: the Torah. BTW will you show me where we see that a person who is
: bchezkus Moshiach can die and then return as Moshiach? The Rambam
: doesn't say that, nor does the Chasam SOfer (in fact the Sdei Chemed
: says clearly that should a candidate die, he is no longer a candidate)
Bull. Walpo and most others were advancing arguments that he was _mashiah
vadai."
--
ande...@philadelphia.libertynet.org
DISCLAIMER: All views expressed herein are solely my own unless otherwise
indicated.
Moshe Shulman
Hey Josh, lighten up.
Eli Cohen
On 7 Feb 1995, Moshe Shulman wrote:
> This is going in circles. I comment that youshould compare his writings on
> halacha with other Poskim. You say he wasn't a posek. Then I agree. And you
> bring a source (which was my original point) that is to show he was. Make up
> your mind.
>
>
>
KAZEN said "he's not a posek." I feel that the Rebbe's writings in
halacha do qualify him as a posek in spite of the fact that the Rebbe did
not answer many individual Shaalos.
Warren Burstein
>2. The Chassam Sofer infers from the fact that a human Moshiach
>can come at any moment that there must be a living candidate. Once
>however we have identified a presumed (Bchezkas) or certain (Bvadai)
>Moshiach, we have no need for a candidate.
Is this the Chatam Sofer's exception, or did someone else make it?
This modification to "there must be a living candidate" seems to not
be a small exception, but changes it to "as long as there was once a
person Bchezkat Mashiach at some point in history there no longer
needs to be a living candidate".
--
/|/-\/-\ If two half-slave-half-free people witness an ox
|__/__/_/ owned in partnership by a Jew and non-Jew gore a Coi
|warren@ bein hashmashot, in which state are the survivors
/ nysernet.org buried?
Yosef Kazen
: YOSEF KAZEN (y...@news.dorsai.org) wrote:
: : What comes to mind is the famous issue on ZIM SHIPPING - an Israeli
: : company owned by Jews and they tried to get a heter for running their
: : ships on Shabbos. The Rebbe pointed out that as an engineer in ship building
: : he knows the ins and outs of what it takes to run the ships and it is
: : not permissble for a Jew to do this on Shabbos.
: He was an engineer in ship building? He also (so I have heard) had 3
: (count 'em, THREE) PhD's in some fields or other. In any case, since
: when does it take an engineer to know that running a modern ship
: involves melachot de'oraita?
: -Shlomo-
The "Poskim" - thos Rabbis whom the Zim people went to were duped.
Thus, the Rebbe wrote those Rabbis that as an engineer he knows what it takes
to run the ship and is advising them to act accordingly.
The general format of "Shaalot U'Teshuvot" - Responsa - works this way.
One does not attempt to deny "credibility" on a fellow Posek, but
rather advises him on the facts and adds suggestion etc allowing for
the Posek to make his rulling.
The above additional information was written in an attempt to stifle
any "bashing" on the issue of Judaic Responsa etc.
YY