Chabad Revisited - Moscow, 1927
We discussed how in far-away Hungary they heard about the Rebbe's arrest and possible execution, r"l. My zeide, a"h, told me so himself. He was 17 at the time. And how in Yerushalayim they didn't say tachnun after the Rebbe was released - as per the orders of Reb Y. Chaim Sonnenfeld, zt"l.
Just reminding you guys.
In Heilman and Friedman's book they claim there is no evidence of an actual death sentence being issued,
ReplyDeleteIs that true?
If a murderer bemayzid like Grossman gets a public levaya and a hesped fit for a groyse rebbe;if a neglectful mother who almost kills her child is treated like royalty;if a fraudster who attempted to defraud banks of millions is worthy of a huge amount of support from the frum press and frumme yidden in general....then it's OK not to say tachanun when the rebbe is freed
ReplyDelete-Isaac: like many of Heilman and Friedman's bombastic statements - their claim is un-sourced. I'd be curious on what basis they dismiss it (at the very least due to lo re'inu aino riya).
ReplyDeleteI'm no fan of second level referencing, which is a hallmark of their book, however, they haven't made a statement here other than to say they haven't found an archival document that describes an actual death sentence.
ReplyDeleteIn this regard, I'm interested to know if Chabad or anyone else has seen such a document?
Not having such a document doesn't mean much unless related documents of the arrest do exist and can be seen today.
Anonymous:
I don't have a problem with not saying Tachnun on a day of Yeshua, however, my experience tells me that when Am Yisrael were delivered a miracle-laden Yeshua during, say, the 6 day war, this also calls, at least, for no Tachnun (unless one subscribes to the Satmar Shita that it was Ma'ase Soton r"l).
Mottel,
ReplyDeleteYou are a funny dude.Do you have a "source" that Rayatz was sentenced to death, besides Lubavitcher "farby" mayses?
If I understand Balbin correctly all Heilman&Friedman said is that there is no evidence of a death sentence, that does not equal "bombastic" and that does not equal "un-sourced". (it appears that you don't even know what un-sourced means, actually)
I do recall that you "backed up" the well known Golem story with a dubious "source", though every one with a little knowledge knows that Yiddel Rosenberg made up that bubbeh maaseh.Unfortunately, I can't take you seriously after that admission.
I"m prepared to bet you dollars-to-doughnuts that you never even bothered to read Heilmans book, yet you are sure that it's full of "bombastic statements"! I had the same experience when Lubavitchers were attacking Dr David Bergers book without even bothering to read it..
Look up the word h-a-g-i-o-g-r-a-p-h-y, your type of apologist is going to be accused of this so often that it's kedai you at least know the meaning of the word
with KGB and GPU killing 20 million.
ReplyDeleteits harder for me to believe that they let him go...
-Isaac Balbin: Rabbi Dr. Alter Metzger researched the entire story while working on his book, Heroic Struggle. It clearly references communications from the Red Cross and such to overturn the death sentence - IIRC he told me the files on the Frierdiker Rebbe were destroyed. I'll ask him again next time I see him.
ReplyDeleteIn light of all the above, it would have been appropriate for Heilman and Freidman to explain their statement in a footnote.
-Shmilu: I seem to recall you as a boorish ignorant miscreant, who resorts to ad ad hominem attacks instead of true academic discussion. I'm glad to see that my memory has served me properly.
1. Why wouldn't statements by the Rebbe and others involved and present during the arrest be taken as legitimate? Do you subscribe to the same theory as the authors of that book, that first hand testimony need not be accepted as true if it contradicts their own speculation and theories?
2. See my comment to Isaac for an explanation of my un-sourced statement.
3. I never "backed up" Yiddel Rosenberg's story. I'm very much aware that it is a work of fiction. If you will recall correctly, all I said was that the Previous Rebbe went into the attic - a related by his successor the Rebbe. In any event, it would seem that the idea of a Golem being created by the maharal existed as an oral tradition well before Rosenberg.
4. My statement about the Golem is not the reason you dismiss me. It is because I am a Lubavitcher. Please. In any event, I'm not bothered by your inability to take me seriously. For while I post with my name, you snivel behind a semi-anonymous moniker.
5. How much will you be giving me? You can mail the money to Tzig if you like - he'll get it to me . . . I read the book before you did, if you bothered to read it all (Scratch that: from the fact that you must relay on Isaac Balbin to "understand" "all Heilman&Friedman said," it is eminently clear that you are the one that never read the book. In which case I tell you: Get a life.)
6
Issac B
ReplyDeleteWhy not go further and question the whole arrest? have they found evidence of that?
There were eye witness accounts to the arrest, were there not and these corroborated.
ReplyDeleteI'm not suggesting a death sentence wasn't issued. I am just asking whether what H&F claimed is true; namely that there is no record of such.
I've wondered about many other things. for example is it true that a member of the Althaus family heard raised voices involving the Rayatz and the last Rebbe about the latter intending to go to University? You might say "so what" but it would be of great interest to know if the Rayatz was 100% behind that move. On the other hand the bitul of the last Rebbe to the Rayatz would seemingly imply that the latter would not do something if the Rayatz objected to it.
I think all these mysteries give birth to the types of research and attitudes from people such as H&F.
Anonymous: people such as the Red Cross calling for a death penalty to be rescinded may be evidence but only if the red cross made such statements on the basis of fact. I would imagine they would react or be asked to react even if it was a very strong rumour.
There is a death sentence (by firing, not clear if squad or one executioner was the method prescribed) for the Rebbe Rayatz on file in the KGB archives, and it is then crossed out and marked as commuted. The documents are now declassified and are easy enough to find.
ReplyDeleteMottel,
ReplyDeleteI think a chill pill would be in order......
With your and Hirshels reshis I"d like to make a few comments.
Quoting you....
"4. My statement about the Golem is not the reason you dismiss me. It is because I am a Lubavitcher. Please. In any event, I'm not bothered by your inability to take me seriously. For while I post with my name, you snivel behind a semi-anonymous moniker. "
You are indeed correct that for me when it comes to Jewish history or any issue when a need for objectivity comes up the mere fact that someone is a card carrying Lubavitcher is a serious impediment to taking them seriously.The reason is not personal, rather the mere fact that someone can belong to a group involved in very starnge and partisan practice makes them lose credibility.Fact is that a large part of Lubavitch belong to a group who do not accept what happened on Gimmel Tammuz 16 years ago as "fact" is a red line for me.Unfortunately that group includes many people who besides for this and very partisan beliefs about Chabad and Judaism bichlal, are rabbonim,scientists or otherwise gainfully employed, which leeds to the conclusion that when anything Lubavitch is raised they cannot discuss it objectively.Off course the fact that the other Lubavitch group that has accepted Gimmel Tammuz has not ostracized the former group besides some very extreme elements, does not give the latter much credibility either.Additionally anyone who has visited the Ohel will quickly realize that what goes on there is not very rational either.Knocking on the door, writing, than reading out aloud P"anim, schlepping young kids there for a shabbos stayover etc...
At the end of your attack you "chapped" me for not having read Heilmans book.
No, I did not,I thought that was abundantly clear from my understanding of Balbins quote.All I was saying is that Heilman probably did not say that Rayatz was NOT sentenced to death, rather that there is no evidence that they found.In that case Lubavitch would need to source that sentence.
ah, Shmilu
ReplyDeletethe enlightened one.
I assume you don't
cover the לחם משנה either since bread doesn't have feelings
and don't wave no chicken over your keppelle since chickens can't atone for you
shall I go on, or is your tail between your legs already?
Shmilu
ReplyDeleteif you're too daft to see that when they see that "they haven't seen the document" they mean to cast doubt, then that's your problem.
"As the Rebbe approached the table, he observed the documents of his case lying there. He noticed that the first line had been crossed out, nullifying the original death sentence. The next line stated that the Rebbe should be sent away to prison for ten years to Solovaki; next to it was written "Nyet-no!" On the last line was written: "Three years Kostroma.""
ReplyDelete(The Heroic Struggle, page 147.)
See also Sefer Hasichot 5701, p. 139. Likkutei Sichot, vol. 4, p. 1062-1063.
-CR: You should know by know - the haters will never believe what we say - documented or otherwise. I'm surprised they believe there's even an Aibershter - after all if Lubavitchers believe so strongly in the Borei Olam, how can he exist?
ReplyDeleteMottel is spinning another. Lubavith has made so much nonesense up that the only thing we believe is what you hear from the Rebbe's mouth, then the Chassidim tell you he didn't really mean this (e.g. Yossel Gutnick's diamond mining discoveries which never eventuated in the way the Rebbe said...)
ReplyDeleteOne thing we do have proof of is that Lubavitch is more about image than reality. O.k. so you tell me all kraizen are like that. There was a quote in an interview in a national financial newspaper where a PR executive from a top Manhattan firm said he was paid by Lubavitch and even met with the Rebbe to ensure the correct PR message was being spread.....
I can send in written proof of this....
Anonymous:
ReplyDeleteIf you can point to the easy to find declassified KGB documents I would gleefully pass them onto H&F and ask them to justify shoddy research on that item.
Chabad-Revisited:
What you noted is known, but what H&F were commenting about, perhaps as part of their straw man, was that there was no existing corroborating evidence. Again, that's not to allege it wasn't true.
Isaac
ReplyDeletehave you seen the R' Chaim Rappaport rebuttal to the WHOLE BOOK?
"Isaac
ReplyDeletehave you seen the R' Chaim Rappaport rebuttal to the WHOLE BOOK?"
Oh,
Just a small li'l problem:Rappaport is a Lubavitcher.Of course he is "unbiased" and without any agenda.
Ahem.
At least Rappaport was honest enough to admit on the Seforim Blog that he is a Lubavitcher and may therefore be perceived as having a bias, nevertheless he tries to convince us, that he is able to deal with the issue in an unbiased manner.I"m sure the Tzig and Mottel are convinced and if they are not a small shot of kool-aid will do the trick.Unfortunately Rappaport has not convinced me of anything besides being a paid mouthpiece of Lubavitch.inc.
I like how Tzig writes about the rebuttal to the WHOLE BOOK in capital letters.How "convincing".
If anyone cares to see the comments on the seforim blog they"ll see that we are still unable to fathom out what exactly was the draw of Berlin and Paris according to the Rappaport version.
Issac Balbin,
ReplyDeletedo you reliaze that H&F never took the minimum route of common researching to go thru the Rebbes Reshimus, that he wrote in Paris and Berlin. now after that fact and many other facts were brought to light they try to hint that the Reshumas are like kind of forged,so with this logoc we can ask how do we know that it was such a person like RMMS, all the photos and videos are forged by Jem
Isac
ReplyDelete"If you can point to the easy to find declassified KGB documents I would gleefully pass them onto H&F and ask them to justify shoddy research on that item."
you are wasting your time with Friedman, from day he was out to do smear job, That idiot is going on TV for years that he is the writing the mother of all books on the Rebbe.And all we see is a farce.
Shmilu
ReplyDeletecan we start open a discussion on Rapaports review ?or you want to talk like a ferd on and on?
Gentleman,
ReplyDeleteI am in the middle of the book. As it was, I had just read the section about the arrest when this blog post came up and hence my comment/question. So far, I have been disappointed in the book in the sense that it has been quoting secondary sources, some of which are not well sourced.
I have printed our R' Rapopport's essay but wanted to read it only after finishing the book.
That R' Rapopport is a Lubavitcher is not an issue to me any more than Professor Friedman having a history of looking like he has an axe to grind, is not an issue per se.
I've only ever been interested in the facts, should those facts be available. Certainly, I accept that in the absence of evidence at least two plausible approaches to understanding things are possible. Both approaches: the Chabad interpretation and the non or anti Chabad interpretation may be plausible, but they won't be anything more than conjecture unless they are very solidly backed up.
Reshimos certainly should be part of the information someone assimilates in order to come to a view. That being said, official letters themselves are often contradictory by nature because one doesn't know the full circumstance of the questioner or situation at hand.
One thing is for sure, I've always found this fascinating. The last Rebbe was certainly not as "readable" as his predecessors in terms of his early history. His was not a standard induction.
Unfortunately, many grab the book and read it in order to discredit Chabad. Others read the book in order to discredit the authors. I'm just interested to read it from an academic stand point.
Why does everything revolve about Hungary. The rebbe was arrested for his activities in Russia and you talk about Hungary !
ReplyDeleteI would be more interested in knowing the reaction of Russian Jews to these events. Did the average Jew in Russia know what was happening, did he even know of the arrest, did the average Chabad person know about it ?What was the reaction of Russian jewry to the Rebbe's arrest to his releae and to his exit from the USSR ? These are all questins never discussed in Chabad history.
"I am an orthodox Jew. I consider myself to be a disciple of the late Lubavitcher Rebbe, and although I studied in other Yeshivot (Manchester and Gateshead), and I am familiar with a broad array of orthodox theologies, my main training was in Lubavitch. "
ReplyDeleteI take issue with the above, copied and pasted from the Seforim blog, by Chaim Rappaport.
Why?
Because Rappaport did most of his learning alone building on what he learned in Manchester Yeshiva and Gateshead and his "training" in Lubavitch was negligible because Rappaport is a bright fellow, a decent scholar, and Lubavitch does not have any real scholars to learn from, since Rav Gustman left 50 some years ago.
Rappaport has to back up Lubavitch since he made a childish mistake of joining their ranks as a young bochur and suffering ridicule because of it.Not unlike our resident "scholar" the TZIG.
Once upon a time Rappaport had his eye on the position of Chief Rabbi, unfortunately that is not feasible today because of some new Lubob rabbis on the block who have much larger elbows.Rappaport after all is a scholar and stands no chance against "professional" (and ignorant)Lubob wannabe rabbis
Isaac Balbin:
ReplyDeleteAs you read the book you will, I hope, take note of all the assumptions and "hear-says" H&F take for granted, without in anyway alluding to the lack of corroboratory evidence. It is interesting to note how they pick and chose in which cases to make such comments.
Shmilu:
"Unfortunately Rappaport has not convinced me of anything besides being a paid mouthpiece of Lubavitch.inc."
Rappaport backed up all his arguments with clear documentation. Be mekabel es ho'emes m'mi she'omro.
"we are still unable to fathom out what exactly was the draw of Berlin and Paris according to the Rappaport version"
Bravo! You managed to unearth one point that it is not easily understood (though Rapport does draw on his understanding of the Rebbe's thought and teachings to offer some explanation).
But you're entirely missing the point: Rappaport never claimed that he had a complete understanding of the Rebbe's life and goals.
But he does - as any fair minded person must admit - clearly and successfully demonstrate that the foundations of H&F's thesis are based on clear falsifications and often stand in contradiction to readily available documentation.
Chabad revisited,
ReplyDeleteThe Tzig regretfully censors my post so I"m not sure if this will get thru.
Anyway Rappaport on the Seforim blog convinced none of the posters.Besides the Lubavitch apologists who did not need any convincing anyway.
He managed to find a few small mistakes, that is about it.
kABEL ES HOEMES.
shmilu
ReplyDeleteyou're a choshed b'chsheyrim and a sad excuse for a human being.
I censored nothing. Just because your drivel wasn't moderated right away doesn't mean I censor. I'm trying to earn a living here. I don't sit around all day waiting for your precious, hateful comment to come down the pike.
R' Schneur
ReplyDeleteIch hub gornisht gemeint...
"I censored nothing. Just because your drivel wasn't moderated right away doesn't mean I censor. I'm trying to earn a living here."
ReplyDeleteYou and Mottel are on Lubavitch inc. p.r.payroll?
Hey, you never did answer what exactly you were doing spending shabbos in a cemetery with young kids.
Child abuse named "hiskashres"
What a cult.
Shmilu
ReplyDeleteOK. I see.
Nice knowing you.
Don't waste your time writing here anymore.
What irks you so?
ReplyDeleteYou allowed publication of taking 10 year olds.Am I not allowed to question that?
I think it's wrong
I count you among the 10 year olds here and I allow you to shoot your mouth off, but don't keep on insulting our intelligence. Don't keep on coming back with the same stupid "kool-aid" comment over and over again.
ReplyDeleteYou're a boor.
Goodbye.
And btw, I did not mean "child abuse" in the way you apparently understood it.I meant that forcing little kids to go there on a shabbos is very inappropriate.In fact this Ohel thing itself is quite strange even for adults
ReplyDeletenobody forced them, they enjoy being there among fellow Jews and Chassidim. I realize a recluse like yourself has a hard time identifying with that, but it's true.
ReplyDeleteMore evidence that you talk before you think.
I"ll be honest with you, now.Even I agree that some of my remarks are not very refined, though usually it's in answer to a not very nice one from your side, but I have not been accused of being unintelligent by anybody with a certain degree of understanding.And I have no problem with you moderating language you fing not appropriate.
ReplyDeleteBut you know that what you really don't like is that I challenge Lubavitcher myths,Golem stories, vilification of biographies by your so called "unbiased" reviewers and paid bashers.Bekitser, you don't like tough questions or any dialogue with people who actually know Lubavitch with all it's warts and yes with some of the good things there to.
"nobody forced them, they enjoy being there among fellow Jews and Chassidim"
ReplyDeleteUh oh,
This is starting to sound crazy.
So ten year olds would like to sit around all shabbos farbrenging in a beis hachaim??
I don't think so, unless they have been indoctrinated (you know k**l-aided, but that is not a word you like)
again you choose to ignore my responses to your "enlightened" statements here
ReplyDeleteDoes your 10 year old twirl a chicken around his head once a year? does he enjoy it? is he indoctrinated?
does he think that a man who lived 3500 years ago comes to visit him and millions of others every Passover night?
I assume you were never there for Shabbos and have no idea, otherwise - considering that you think very highly of yourself - I'd have to say that you're stam a ferd
You are correct that I don't "twirl chickens".I wonder what you and your guys are thinking when they are busy twirling white chickens on Erev Yom Kippur.I"m sure you have never bothered to *think* about it, since you do things by rote.
ReplyDeleteComparing that to being "lan b'beis hakevoros" is quite a stretch even for you.
1) noboy sleeps in the cemetery. They sleep in houses and tents outside and MiChutz LiTchum. But you knew that
ReplyDelete2) do you believe that black boxes and straps connect you to G-d, or is that too passe'?
So, yeah the Lubavitcher strategy comes out with all its circular logic.Compare a Mitva in the Torah, that we do BECAUSE HASHEM told us to, with a newfangled meshigheneh custom of making shabbos in a beis hachaim?
ReplyDeleteOf course doing mitzvos connects you to Hashem even Chukim we don't understand
Now I have a question for you.
ReplyDeleteWhy does one shlog kappures for an unborn child, what kapureh do they need?
Shmilu,
ReplyDelete"hough every one with a little knowledge knows that Yiddel Rosenberg made up that bubbeh maaseh"
if you are so arrogant and so full of yourself, please get your facts straight, Yudel Rosenberg wrote a nice fiction book on the Maharal and the Golem, but the Golem without the details of rosenberg was a legend in Ashkenazi Klal Yisroel for genaration earlier. my Grandfather that would be today 114 years, heard about it from his parents. And I think the Benai Yisoscher talks about the Golem too.
"Rappaport on the Seforim blog convinced none of the posters.Besides the Lubavitch apologists who did not need any convincing anyway."
ReplyDeleteI Menachem Butler a Lubavitch apologist?
"I Menachem Butler a Lubavitch apologist?"
ReplyDeleteNo.
Did you seem him convinced?
Tread carefully here, though, because if you use Menachem Butler here be prepared to accept when he doesn't see eye to eye with you on Lubavitch issues.
One thing that is difficult to abide is using people or information only when it suits your agenda
-Anon: Shmilu will not answer your question - just has he didn't respond to me when I made the same statement. He functions solely by means of ad hominem attacks and inane circular logic.
ReplyDelete-Shmilu: funny you mention Butler - he doesn't hold of your guilty until needed innocent status for all Lubavitchers - he was more the accepting of Rapoports valid ta'anos and suggested that idiots like you respond to the actual monograph written by Rapoport instead of squabbling over his credentials.
What was so damning about "the" book?
ReplyDeleteShmilu,
ReplyDelete"You are indeed correct that for me when it comes to Jewish history or any issue when a need for objectivity comes up the mere fact that someone is a card carrying Lubavitcher is a serious impediment to taking them seriously.The reason is not personal, rather the mere fact that someone can belong to a group involved in very starnge and partisan practice makes them lose credibility." Since we are honored to have a serious history scholar in the circus house, I would like to inquire and verify on your thoughts on the following, do you believe Artscroll, CIS, Aron Surasky, Maseh Ish, Hamodia, Yated, or any frum Jew that believes in the obscure concept of Bias Hamoshiach? Am I talking to a new Duvid Assaf on the block? please clarify your views.If I will proof to your honor that Metzger, Rappaport, Levin, Mundshine( all Lubavich universally accepted historians) believed that Gimmel Tamuz was a day of dead for RMMS,will you accept them as valid historians? you know that your approval is very crucial for the chabad historians, you have the power to make it or break for them.
Anon,
ReplyDeleteMoondshine and the others believe the Rebbe was niftar, but they still belong to a group that has not banished the crazies/meshichisten.Belonging to such a group does not give one too much credibility.
If Chabad want to gain respect they have to take a serious stand against the meshugoim, unfortunately they will not.
Shmilu,
ReplyDelete"schlepping young kids there for a shabbos stayover etc...
so your honor believes that whoever visited Lizensk or Miron on a shabbos with a child is nullified from being a historian? how about a posek? Is Reb Yechezkel Roths pesokim acceptable by your honor? since he moved to Miron and he has some grandchildren staying over for Shabosim in Miron? I assume that all the 20,000 that flock to Uman for Rosh Hashona, are Persona non Grata in your universe of historical accuracy.
Shmilu,
ReplyDeleteas far as I know that recently the above listed historians( its not from history it happened lately since I am not approved by the Shmilu History Board)condemned the "Meshugaim" so are they approved by your honor?
Shmilu,
ReplyDelete"and Lubavitch does not have any real scholars to learn from, since Rav Gustman left 50 some years ago."
how mny Talmidie chachomim do you know in lubavich from the Gustman days? how many talmidie chachomim do you know from after Gustman. When did the Kalmanson brothers, Reb Libel Shapiro, Rav Gerlitzky, Rav Wilshansky, Reb Mottel Ashkenazi, Rav Goldberg etc.. learn in lubavich? in the Gustman years?
how do you measure a scholar?
Shmilu,
ReplyDelete"Rappaport has to back up Lubavitch since he made a childish mistake of joining their ranks as a young bochur and suffering ridicule because of it"
are you Rappaports shrink?is this something that you assume from your professional observations, in how many fields do you excel, you are coming across as a very multifaceted fellow, WOW
Shmilu,
ReplyDelete"Circular logic.Compare a Mitva in the Torah, that we do BECAUSE HASHEM told us to, with a newfangled meshigheneh custom "
do u believe that Hashem said Minhag Yisroel Torah Hu? and we Charidie Jews believe that poking fun at a minhag is on the verge of Kefira
Shmilu,
ReplyDelete"At the end of your attack you "chapped" me for not having read Heilmans book."
At the end of all your attacks I realized that u didn"t read Hielmans book and many other books too, just a simple nobody
Issac
ReplyDeleteon the other hand, if the Stalin regime were killing people that were proselyting religion for the youth,then why on earth should they not rule a death sentence for the ringleader?
the academic world that you praised so much in the twersky post laughs at the relevations of the rayatz...even r y mundshine admits 18 elul came down in 1947...
ReplyDelete"and Lubavitch does not have any real scholars to learn from, since Rav Gustman left 50 some years ago."
ReplyDeleteJust to make it clear, Rav Gustman was never a Lubavitcher, and in fact once said that they are Ovdei Avoda Zaroh (reffering to the Rebbe)
"Anyway Rappaport on the Seforim blog convinced none of the posters."
Convinced me, and I am quite a snag. H & F are WORSE than biase! They are am Heratzim. They make SOME many mistakes that the simplest yeshiva bachour wouldnt make. I am pretty sure that there is more to Berlin and Paris than the Lubavitchers would admit, but the book written by H & F seem to be a stupid book by two am Hratzim!
Does anybody know why Chabad has a disdain and bad taste in their mouth when someone mentions Rav Gustman? What happened there?
ReplyDeleteIt seems it's more like Rav Gustman having disdain for Chabad, no? He was the one making the negative statements.........
ReplyDeleteI never heard negative statements from him (or in his name). I wonder why Lubavitchers get queasy when I mention his name to them. I assumed it was because there was known friction. It is well-known that he left bishitah (the Kletzker told him to leave)
ReplyDeleteAgav: in his job interview, the FR asked him what his goals were. He said: next time you don't need to get an outsider as a Ram, and you can use one of your own.
[Who replaced him? The Amshinover's eydem?]
CONFUSED
ReplyDeletesee the comment one above your first one.
Just to make it clear, Rav Gustman was never a Lubavitcher, and in fact once said that they are Ovdei Avoda Zaroh
that sounds disparaging to me...
zzzzzzzz
ReplyDeleteYou are not speaking on point. (Unless you are asserting that it is common knowledge in Chabadland that Rav Gustman made that remark; which you aren't)
Twistleton
ReplyDelete"and in fact once said that they are Ovdei Avoda Zaroh (reffering to the Rebbe)"
Are you sure that he said that? since I remember he provided a Torah to a Kovetz Torani in honor of the Rebbe, so or he was providing torah for Jews for J too? or the chabadniks stole it in the midst of the nite? but the Sipur will stand forever.
"Twistleton
ReplyDelete"and in fact once said that they are Ovdei Avoda Zaroh (reffering to the Rebbe)"
Are you sure that he said that? since I remember he provided a Torah to a Kovetz Torani in honor of the Rebbe, so or he was providing torah for Jews for J too? or the chabadniks stole it in the midst of the nite? but the Sipur will stand forever."
My father heard it from his mouth. But do you really think that he was actually prepeared to cut Lubavitchers heads off, or REALLY veiwed them as Jews for J? Aside from the fact that he may have been only referring to some (the early Boranunicks?), people say many extreme things in the heat of the moment, or even in general, to show how strongly they feel etc… You guys are constantly explaining wacky Chassidish stories/sayings as not to be taken literally, and I don’t know if this is any different. Rav Gustman was criticizing (AS MANY OTHER GEDOLIM, INCLUDING THE REBBE DID) the extreme cult of personality that exists in Lubavitche today.