You're not alone! Read the introductory chapter to Chaim Weiser's brilliant "Frumspeak: The First Dictionary of Yeshivish", entitled "Yeshivish, the Language: A Linguistic Determination of Yeshivish" (most of it is available on the Google Books preview, pp. xv-xix)
Ok, I’m probably stepping in deep do do by commenting here since I follow little of it. I’ll just say I’ve been to 770 a couple of times with sane Chabadniks and the ghost worshippers seemed like a small, not entirely tolerated, minority. Most Chabad are not meshichist in this way.
I've heard a lot of different things. My rough understanding is that the moderates (many of whom are only tactically moderate) lost control of 770, but still have the Ohel. But what does it matter, just don't go to either.
I'll never forget: soon after R' Berger's book came out, I had the great good fortune of sitting at the shabbos table of a very prominent, very learned, and very worldly "modernische" rav and posek, and I asked him what he thought of Berger's arguments about Chabad.
By way of answer, he spread his hands and said, "but look at all the good they do!"
This seems to have become the "party line" for all but the blackest-of-black mainstream Litvish folks.
Yes, the infamous 'but when my cousin was backpacking in Burma they gave her grape juice' clause in Hilchos Avodah Zarah.
This is all R' Norman Lamm's fault. Arguably it's really JBS who is to blame, since he could easily have put an end to Chabad infiltration of Modern Orthodoxy had he wanted to, and should have done so both based on his personal hashkafah and family background, but we can at least be דן לכף זכות for him that had he lived longer and seen what happened he would have been modeh to Rav Shach.
It's not just giving grape juice to backpackers in Burma. I know many, many frum people who've been kiruv'd by Chabad and now are shomer shabbos, keep kosher, learn Torah etc. Chabad has brought meaningful Judaism to countless lives in ways that MO, much less the yeshivish world, never did as far as I know.
Technically, Christianity has brought billions to monotheism (as well as most of the rest of the 7 mitzvos of bnei noach), and indeed Rambam gives it credit for that. Doesn't make it kosher, or not AZ.
When you're right, you're right. Modern Orthodoxy (I hate that term, but there you have it) makes effectively no attempt at kiruv, and non-Chabad black-hat kiruv efforts peaked in the '90s (as has been amply documented elsewhere).
Chabad is pretty much the only game in town (i.e., the entire world) these days when it comes to significant Jewish outreach, and they only go from strength to strength.
Their outreach "model" of promoting affiliation and minimal mitzvah performance over rigorous observance is controversial, but their success on their own terms cannot be gainsaid.
Also, of the (many) Jews who do wind up becoming religious as a result of Chabad, I don't know of any who became a "meshichist".
This right here, Chabad was the only game in town for most places I went (before and as a Chabadnik).
It wasn't til I got the opportunity to see the rest of the world that I drifted from their grasp because it was more and more apparent and difficult to ignore the discrepancy in their practice vis a vis the books and what I started seeing others doing that were "equally as religious".
I know, man, I know! I'm not saying I agree, just telling you the metzius.
Although perhaps it should count for something that folks of the stature of R' Lamm, R' Soloveitchik, and the guy I mentioned (who, as you may have intuited, was a talmid of both) *declined* to condemn them?
Come on, rabbi Soloveitchik actively supported the Chabad Rebbe because of his background (having had a chabad melamed) and his brother wrote an infamous letter of 'support' for the meshichistin
(that said, as a misnaged-ben-misnagdim, I have no inclination to either frequent the so-called "Ohel" nor visit 770... except perhaps as a matter of historical curiosity, as one might visit Westminster Abbey)
I have no doubt. But our host, the blog owner, would argue that "meaningful moments" are no heter for visiting a place of "avodah zarah" (no more than he would countenance visiting a church like Westminster Abbey, I suspect).
Yeah, but I'm not accepting that Chabad is "Avodah Zarah" because a. it's only some Chabad who see the Rebbe as actually Moshiach as opposed to having been or even being a "potential Mosiach." and b. because, Rambam notwithstanding--and I am a fan of his--I do not accept that Christianity is Avodah Zarah. Really, if you want to be a purist, every version of Judaism I've seen has some elements of superstition that could be considered AZ, whether it's collecting Rabbi cards, visiting graves, or covering your open water containers at night. . . but I haven't been to Lakewood, so maybe they're above all that. . . .
I couldn't agree more with everything you just said 👍
Incidentally, I think *all* the superstitious nonsense that has no basis in Torah/halachah—including everything you mentioned—should be expurgated from legitimate Judaism. (This is one reason I like R' Natan Slifkin's stuff so much.)
"Ben-Gvir is married to Ayala Nimrodi, a distant relative of Ofer Nimrodi, the former owner of the Maariv daily newspaper.[8] They met around 2002 when Nimrodi was 15 and Ben-Gvir was 26[7] and married in 2004.[86] Reportedly, the couple visited the grave of Baruch Goldstein, a mass murderer, on their first date.[7][87][88]"
Imagine if Nick Fuentes took his fiance (OK, I know a stretch, but imagine) to the grave of Robert Gregory Bowers on their first date. Even groypers would be like 'bro, what?'.
I'm a Lubavitcher, so I thought other readers might be interested in an insider perspective on this new group of people our good host has introduced to so many of you.
Perhaps not shockingly, I strongly disagree with this characterization of my people. There is some truth here, but it's pretty unfairly twisted and exaggerated, the usual fruits of arrogance>ignorance>contempt.
Starting with the concessions:
Yes, there are some pretty over-the-top, plausibly avodah-zarah engaging people within Chabad-Lubavitch. Yes these elements have captured some important physical territory, the main shul in our HQ building. (How this happened is a long and sad story, but it mostly comes down to a leadership vacuum post the rebbe's passing in '94 and New York State being really bad at enabling landlords to evict unlawful tenants and trespassers.)
But these people really are a minority. How small is hard to say, because some off this stuff is on a spectrum in a way that's really hard to explain to an outsider not versed in our theology, but the people who believe and practice things that are indefensible to eighty-plus percent of normative Orthodox Judaism make up not more than 5% of the movement. Unfortunately, their extremism coupled with our decentralized leadership post the Rebbe's passing has meant that we have been unable to eject them from the movement or retake the physical 770 building from them. (We did get them to stop "tunneling" though! Small victories).
But Chabad as a whole today sits squarely within the Jewish mainstream. We are in many ways the most dynamic and active group in the world (Pew research found that 38% of American Jews have interacted or regularly interact with Chabad), and we do a lot to improve the material and spiritual welfare of hundreds of thousands of Jews around the globe (Israel's biggest food bank/soup kitchen is a multi-hundred year old Chabad charity organization, for example).
Contrary to what our host has said or implied in this piece and in the comments, there are vanishingly few Orthodox Jews whose issues with Chabad rise to a level where they would not, for example, eat our food, use our mikvaos, trust our kiddushin and gittin, accept our geirim, trust our safrus, cooperate with our Battei Dinim, etc. He may wish it were otherwise, but that is the reality today.
First of all, I appreciate the respectful response. Secondly, while I understand that you find this upsetting, I do not believe you are actually disagreeing with me about the pertinent facts namely (i) a certain proportion of Chabad are heretics, (ii) they have taken over 770 (iii) they invited and hosted Ben Gvir (iv) Ben Gvir was party to their public expression of heresy and this is all on camera. I would therefore think that you would be even more appalled than me since not only is Ben Gvir affirming heresy, he is also - according to you - soiling unjustly the name of your movement.
However, with all that said, you are either delusional or deliberately stating untruths. The vast majority of Chabad chassidim in Israel are Moshachists, and this alone means that your 5% is preposterous. However, even in America, 5% is clearly not true. My advice to you is simply to leave Chabad. Judaism did fine without either Chabad for thousands of years, and it would do fine without Chabad now. However, if you want to remain in your movement, your energies are more properly employed not in telling me that everything is fine, but in combatting the heresy within your own movement so that I no longer have anything to object to.
I will close with a story. In the first week after Oct 7th, I was volunteering on an army base, and a Chabadnik was handing out copies of תפילת הדרך, with the face of your dead Rebbe and the word משיח on them. I was tired and a bit emotional, so I was less phlegmatic than usual and gave it to him. He told me that he wasn't a Moshiachist, but that he didn't have any other copies of tefilas haderech to hand out. TBH, I think he was just lying, but this nevertheless, I think this illustrates quite well the attitude of moderate Chabadniks. Sure, you are not personally a heretic, but you don't object to it, and you'd prefer I was a heretic than a normal not-Chabad Jew. So fix that.
Believing that the Rebbe is mashiach is lunacy, not heresy. No, not even a safek heresy. So that is not germane to the percentage of heretical Chabadnics.
First off, minor note, the correct phonetic spelling would be "Mechichist", Chabad's Russian-accented havara pronounces Moshiach as "Meshiach" unless the speaker/reader is taking care.
Second, I didn't engage with your main thrust because I don't really care about it. Ben Gvir is your lunatic, you deal with him, I have plenty of my own to deal with here. I also think you'd be pleased (or disappointed to have your stereotype undermined) to know that a Chabad House invited Ben Gvir to speak and then canceled on him after the main Shluchim office intervened. (Why did the Chabad House invite him in the first place? Because he's an Israeli minister and most shluchim don't know enough about Israeli politics to know that this is not the kind of Israeli minister you can have speaking to your diverse crowd at your fundraiser or student event).
I am not worried about being soiled, because Chabad's reputation is not made in the media but in the tens of thousands of daily interactions Jews of all walks of life have with us. We'll avoid bad press if we can, but this is not something we stress about.
As for me being delusional or speaking untruths, I would start with defining the "Heretics". As I alluded to, there is a spectrum, and in my opinion there are flavors of Meshichist thought and practice that are merely wrongheaded, not heretical. So by my own definition, I think I'm being very fair and accurate.
And Judaism would do fine without Chabad? Without Chabad there would be tens of thousands of fewer Jews living G-dly, observant lives, and hundreds of thousands fewer who had any connection to G-d and their heritage at all. Also probably just fewer Jews existing period, considering how many Jew-Jew marriages Chabad has facilitated and encouraged over the years. Seems pretty not fine to me.
Regarding your story, sounds plausible. Your takeaway, that this illustrates the "moderate Chabad" position is also accurate, though not for the reasons you think. Us moderates deal with you nudniks all the time and the juice is usually just not worth the squeeze trying to explain ourselves, unless it's happening in particular favorable circumstances. This stuff is complicated, it's a live issue for us, and the people asking questions usually have very piquant opinions and a strong conviction that they know all they need to know on the subject.
“Us moderates deal with you nudniks all the time and the juice is usually just not worth the squeeze trying to explain ourselves, unless it's happening in particular favorable circumstances. This stuff is complicated, it's a live issue for us, and the people asking questions usually have very piquant opinions and a strong conviction that they know all they need to know on the subject.”
Unfortunately, this is the kind of conversation stopper that people hear all the time from lots of quarters in lots of contexts, and it never is very good in encouraging trust.
By the way, I’m not taking sides in this between the two of you; vibe-wise neither of you convinces my secular soul all that much. But just a thought that if we want to interact more constructively across all the divides - and broadly speaking, yes I think we have to - I don’t think your approach here is optimal. (I’m not sure mine is either but figured I’d give it a shot.)
I'm sure it's not optimal, it's also not even correct from the standpoint of the ideals of the Chabad movement. It's just the reality of what we deal with and the kind of conditioned response it generates in many of us.
I reckon a great majority of Chareidim view idolatry as extinct - you know, Menashe did it, but since then the yetzer for it is gone, and Hinduism is just a pale imitation, Christianity is only guilty of a technicality (tziruf), and with Chabad, let’s let sleeping dogs lie.
You are right, of course - that per rambam, allying with Bibi is even worse than an idolator. At least the anti Eretz Hakodesh faction got that right.
Also, F for your gentile readers. This isn’t pidgin, it’s inside baseball.
Gentile readers need to understand just this much, and it's pretty simple really. The highly political global organization run out of 770 has a well-earned bad reputation among other religious Jews due to their, well... let's say "lacksadaisical" attitude toward the 1st Commandment, which is a pretty big deal in Judaism no matter how you slice it. It was bad enough when their rebbe was still walking the earth, but it's gotten much worse since.
Jewish readers need to understand at least this much: the Gentiles are already judging you based on the actions of these guys, because they can't tell the difference. Not judging the idol worship and heresy, about which they could care less. Rather, judging the political sponsorship and manipulation and dirty tricks. If you fail to repudiate them, you are in the same handbasket, and absolutely deserve the same fate.
Yeah, on your second point, I agree. I often try to point out to fellow Jews that we'd expect a moderate Muslim to condemn Islamic terrorism, and if they don't, we consider them one and the same - and so it's no surprise of gentiles expect the same standard of us. But very few grok it.
I think the current generation (boomers) of Jewish powerbrokers are stuck in this pattern, but have hope that the upcoming generations will act differently.
I understand the argument. I just don't think that supporting Islamic conquest of the world or very large parts of it is the same as fighting back against Arabs who want to expel you from your home.
Tell me more about Chabad's reputation for "political sponsorship, manipulation, and dirty tricks". As a Lubavitcher, I confess that this is an angle of attack I haven't heard much about before.
The big Modern Orthodox synagogue in Stamford where I grew up has an Israeli flag and an American flag flanking the ark. Not the best. but I get it. But atop the American flag - which people face during the Amidah, bowing and bending towards it - there is a golden eagle.
I had to look up "Brown Man playthrough", but enormously clever comment!
As I did the good Scottish gentleman above, I would refer you to the introductory chapter to Chaim Weiser's brilliant "Frumspeak: The First Dictionary of Yeshivish", entitled "Yeshivish, the Language: A Linguistic Determination of Yeshivish" (most of it is available on the Google Books preview, pp. xv-xix).
That, or spend a few years in yehsivah and the "sprache" comes naturally. Indeed, to this day, I find some terms/thoughts/concepts inexpressible in English.
I have never in a trillion years heard the term "Harry"; had to look it up, but I suppose it's shayach 🤷♂️
Incidentally, I wasn't aware that there was a standard orthography of yeshivish. But again, as I doubt the average bochur would use a term like "Philosemitisch", I'm choshesh that Mahin (who appears, rather, to be a DPhil candidate in divinity) is more practiced in German than Yiddish, so my kavanah in spelling it as I did was to avoid looking like an ignoramus in his eyes (by misspelling what is, after all, a German loanword).
Is it really hard for you to understand why we want to kill our Arab enemies but are more lenient regarding mistaken Jewish brethren? Are you really so stupid, or do you just hate your fellow Jews that much? You'll never be one percent of the man Yishai Fleisher is.
First of all, Naroler and Kretchnif do not count. Much respect for knowing about tiny fringe chassiduses, but that's it. (Parenthetically, google tells me the Narole Rebbe's son is Osher Shapiro who is a famous 'character' in Stamford Hill).
Secondly, it was Menachem Mendel Hager who visited 770, and he is well known for starting his own messianic cult known as the Mendelisten, who have been rightly ostracised after the very disturbing details of what they do came to light. So maybe he was there to take notes. It is is a very serious libel against Vizhnitz to try and associate them with this.
So that leaves Ger, which makes sense, since they are another group on the fringes of Charedi Judaism, utterly despised by everyone, but able to push everyone around because of their money, power and disregard for moral boundaries. They also kidnap children of families who try to leave, so maybe the Gerer Rebbe's son was there to give advice on this.
So to conclude, whatever else you may say about Charedim, they are to be congratulated for maintaining the firewall against Chabad heresy, in total contrast to Right Wing Zionists who actively court it and are totally infiltrated by it.
(P.S. After googling it, I see that the Kretchnif Rebbe didn't even step foot in the schul, he just visited the library).
Can someone explain to me like a I'm retard what specifically is the avoda zara here? Believing that some Rabbi was the mashiah? The weird new rituals? Or is it the content of those rituals?
The ghost worship is similar a chair for Eliyahu hanavi on Pesach so it doesn't seem that outlandish to me.
1) The term Avodah Zarah means strange worship, not more not less. Any form of worship not sanctioned by Jewish tradition or law falls into this category. The term itself is taken from the אש זרה brought by Nadav and Avihu, the issue with which was simply its uncommanded status. Of course, idol worship is a type of Avodah Zarah, and one for which someone who violates it is liable to death, but the allegation of Avodah Zarah itself is not an allegation of idol worship.
2) There are 2 important differences between MMS and Eliyahu haNavi. (1) Sefer Melachim states that Eliyahu haNavi never died whereas MMS did, in fact, die. (2) Sefer Malachi says that Eliyahu haNavi will return, and this belief is repeated throughout Rabbinic sources. To make an analogy, praying towards the temple is not AZ, in fact it is halacha, but praying towards Mecca is AZ. They are both buildings, but that is not the point.
3) The practice of putting out a chair for Eliyahu haNavi is dubious. Its earliest source is a post-talmudic midrash Pirkei d'Rabi Eliezer, which contains no small amount of dubious content. It's popularity today is largely a function of the Zohar, which contains almost nothing except dubious content. I would prefer it not be done, and I do not do it if I can avoid it. However, we have an important rule which is נכרים שבחוצה לארץ לאו עובדי עבודת זרה הן אלא מנהג אבותיהן בידיהן. Though this rule does not strictly apply to Jews, something of the principle does, namely that if they do something that they received by tradition, even if it of bad origin, or is bad by nature, they are not guilty as if they came up with it. Thus what is fundamentally wrong with Chabad is that they are constantly inventing new forms of worship, constantly trying to encourage others to participate and that they do it not because of tradition but because they believe doing so will bring the geulah.
4) With that said, if Eliyahu's Seat was in fact mishnaic law, practiced by all the tanaim and amoraim, and it was used by heretics today to justify new innovations the correct thing to do would be to cancel the practice. The prototype for this is King Hizkiyahu's destruction of the brazen serpent and there are many other examples, such as the prohibition on those who are particular to pray without shoes, or wearing only white as appears in the Mishnah.
1a) This is an idiosyncratic definition. The way Avoda Zara used in the Gemara, halacha, and common parlance, it's a synonym for idol worship. When you use it for something other than idol worship, it doesn't have the same incriminatory implications.
1b) I wonder how you define "strange worship". Like, I see waiting for the Rebbe's ghost to walk out the door as strange worship, that is, a new practice that nobody ever did. But what about a farbrengen? What about a kumsitz? What about finishing Shas in an hour, a new type of fundraising activity I have seen recently. I don't think it has much limud HaTorah value, but is it "strange worship"? What about singing Shabbos zemiros? What about piyutim in shul? How long must things exist before they pass the threshhold of "strange worship"? The Gemara says that Ezra was מתקן ברכות. Without getting into the weeds about how historical this statement is or was intended, if he really did that, would it be an innovative strange worship? For that matter, I can ask about Purim and Chanuka...
4) Amazing! I don't agree with a lot of what you say but you hit it on the nose with this! Unfortunately we don't have real leadership.
You are correct. I learned this peirush on Avodah Zarah from Shabtai Ben Dov via my teachers, but you are correct that it is clearly untenable in light of how the term is actually used in primary sources. As I often say, at least 50% of intellectual progress is not learning new things, but unlearning the wrong things you learned already.
However, I don't think you go far enough. In the Mishnah, the terms is used consistently, not to refer to idol worship, but the idol itself, or a temple, or sometimes a deity. It's not a gerund, but a normal noun. The term עובד עודה זרה doesn't mean 'does avodah zarah', but 'serves an avodah zarah'. In gemara, the term is used in this way too, but also as a gerund, maybe as an ellipsis of עבודת עבודה זרה (and perhaps the reason it is elided it because that sounds kind of naff).
Another point that I try to impress on people is that technical language in TSPB needs to be understood based on how it is used (or, if you are lucky, defined), not on the semantics of the term in ordinary speech. But obviously I failed to take note of that klal in this case.
Now, that's not to say I think the general point I was making is wrong, but clearly AZ is the wrong terminology to use to make it, and I have emended the article accordingly.
It's a spectrum. Some Chabadskers say he is an embodiment of God and pray to him. That's for sure AZ. Others say his ghost is the Mashiach and they "commune" with him which sounds uncomfortably close to Christianity, although I'm not sure why it would technically be AZ. Suppose a sect of Christians that believe Jesus is the Messiah but not God Himself (and there are such sects), would that be AZ? But I can see it maybe being אביזרייהו.
J's witnesses and Unitarians are this. It's not even אביזרייהו and technically one can enter their houses of worship, only reason not to is maris ayin.
I'm kind of unclear as to why you draw the line with messhichistim, and why you expect Jewish political parties in Israel to do the same thing. UTJ thinks Bibi is a menuval u'mkah schchin too - but that doesn't stop them from loyally supporting him to the extent they think he will support their moisdos. I guess on a strictly halachic level kfirah is worse than cheating on your wives, but UTJ thinks every chiloni is a kofer.
And from a religious zionist perspective, the whole movement is based on the idea that you can engage in partnership with kofrim to bring about a greater good - yishuv eretz yisrael. If they thought it would allow them to build one more outpost, they would name it Yechi Adonenu.
The official position of UTJ is that Bibi is tinoq shenishba, or, if not, he's merely a מומר אוכל נבילות לתיאבון. Of course, that's kind of nonsensical given how many of them will sing בנימין ידיד השם, but that is at least their official position. Clearly, this does not apply to Ben Gvir because (a) he's 'religious' and (b) you can't be מומר עובד עבודה זרה לתיאבון
As for DLs, yeah, they have this insane theology, but it's specifically supposed to apply to atheists, not heretics.
Fact is, if this happened in a church, there would be no discussion about what to do. And this should be no different.
Now, of course, it goes without saying that basically all of the boundaries that the Agudists said they would respect have not been respected. But that doesn't mean that I can't protest when they violate another one.
So people in EY (other than Reb Berel Soloveitchik's rebetzin) actually do know about that sefer?
I think R Kotler was being dishonest when saying that this is the basis for the Aguda participating in Israel politics.
Either way, it's been any years since I read it, but I never understood hisnuse of aveira lishma. Doesn't that go against the first principle of Nefesh Hachaim Judaism?
I think the real underpinning of Charedi Judaism is that their 2 greatest manhigim, the Chazon Ish (mostly in his letters to Reb Elchonon Wasserman) and Reb Chaim Ozer (in a long letter discussing the famous machlokes between RSRH and Rav Bamberger and stating that it was just a pragmatic machlokes) had a very pragmatical view of the issur hischabrus l'rshaim.
Well, you can protest, but perhaps the fact you're all het up about this particular one shows that you're just using it as a convenient cudgel with which to bash Zionoids with.
I don't know what this even means in context of the above discussion. However, to respond to the implicit allegation, my views on Chabad messianism have not changed one iota in ten years. All that has changed is that I have become aware of how much it has penetrated religious Zionism, something that I was totally unaware of when I made aliyah. Some people, who I could name, used to consider this a red line, but the second Ben Gvir endorsed it, it's no longer a red line, because, in fact, their only red line is deflating their Bar Kochba fantasies.
I'll elaborate. I am not implying that your view of Chabad has changed, only that your demand that all of Ben Gvir's political allies, and specifically the Chareidim who are in coalition with him, now must abandon and condemn him due to his fraternisation with meshichsitim, seems to be disingenuous.
For as you correctly point out, Chareidim should've fled when Bibi ate pork too, or when Amir Ohana joined the fray or whatever. They didn't, because they hypocrites. I'm simply noting that you're less lathered up by that betrayal, and seem to be more het up by this one, because it happens to fit into a Current Thing you have going against Kahanoids.
Lenzner says the Rebbe, King Moshiach is 'present here today' and that 'he gives strength to the world'. Since, literally speaking, he is buried in the ground, they must be referring to his resurrected spirit or somesuch, which they then address by saying 'Our Lord ... lives, king Moshiach forever'. What about that is *not* Avodah Zarah?
Yeah that's what I mean by ספק עבודה זרה לקולא. Sure, if you want to rely on this kind of reasoning to still your conscience about not arsoning the local Chabad House, then fine, but obviously this isn't an argument to participate or condone in any way this behaviour. Just, like, don't go to 770. Not hard.
Serious question from a Halachic POV - is it, though? I mean, there are serious poskim who say Christianity isn’t AZ, and that is much more overt.
Is considering a dead person as alive AZ? Is addressing them as Lord, AZ? Or do they have to engage in a halachically defined mode of worship?
I know that there is a minute faction of chabad who have gone the whole caboodle and say the Rebbe is a ‘cheilek Elokim mimaal’ or something like that, and there are some who pray to him based on the ludicrous notion of ‘tzaddik goizer v’HKBH mekayeim’ - but I’m still curious as to a formal, sober Halachic analysis.
AZ is just an umbrella term for forbidden worship, like מאכלים אסורים. If it's worship and it's forbidden it's Avodah Zarah. You can argue about what the onesh is in a certain case is, but that's different.
As for Christianity, no-one permits it to Jews, indeed the original heter from Tosefos (which doesn't actually mean what it is often quoted as saying) says explicitly דבני נח לא הוזהרו על כך. So if you want to argue that Chabad is like Christianity, then it is still Avodah Zarah, but a goy who does it doesn't have the din of an עובד עבודה זרה.
Rav Feldman's teshuvos on this are really classic examples of the one-way enforcement of Maimonidean orthodoxy. Anyone who deviates in the direction of 'rationalism' is treif automatically because of13 ikarrim, case closed, but anyone who deviates in the direction of paganism is presumed kosher unless they literally say 'this man is God and I worship him'.
And then we wonder how Judaism became a religion for imbeciles.
What does that mean? I said that the 13 ikkarim are enforced against people who deviate from them in the direction of rationalism, but that whenever anyone deviates from them in the direction of paganism, the excuse-making comes out. I think they should be enforced equally in both directions.
I haven't read them, but there is a logic to the double standard - Slifkinesque rationalism is seductive and insidious, so must be strongly condemned, whilst Chabad messianism is neither of those two, so less a target.
Also, it's likely all polemical anyways - in reality, regular american Chareidim will eat OU hechscher just like they will eat and pray at Chabad of Hong Kong when travelling.
So much to discuss. links between radical settler, kahanists and Chabad are stronger than ppl realise. Rabbis like wolpo (first to declare the Rebbe moshiach) (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shalom_Dov_Wolpo#SOS_Israel), nonzionism's favourite (😅) rav Ginsburg who runs od Yosef chai and provides much of the ideology behind the hilltop youth (including their leader meir ettinger who is related to kahana) https://newvoices.org/2008/09/23/0001-4/
Oi mate, chassidus is weird. That's why the phrase "misnagdim" used to mean something. Personally I think stupid chair pushing rituals and tunneling are better than brawling and sex abuse. But maybe I'm just not nonzionism pilled enough.
Who can forget that famous passage from Jeremiah when G-d said to prophecy unto the people to forsake their abominations, and Jeremiah said to G-d 'why are you being all fussy, they mean well' and G-d said 'you're right, what we need is Jewish Pride 🇮🇱💪'?
How am I supposed to know what it says in Nach? I'm not a girl.
I must, however, have missed the braisa where any upward limit was established on the kavod that can be given to one's rebbe, during or after his life.
I'm assuming you are joking here. Ignoring whether or not this is Avoda Zara (it probably is) this will never be denounced in a million years. These guys are hardcore og Otzma Yehudit voters. A large part of the sefardi Otzma guys just tune out the craziness while loving Chabad.
His voters are נמשל כבהמות נדמו. I mean the other religious parties. Gafni and Smotritch must announce today that they will not sit in a government with Ben Gvir, and they must threaten to leave the government, and do so if necessary. Anything else is completely discrediting.
You know perfectly well that won't happen. But how will your own attitude change when they continue to look the other way? What does it mean to you to live in a "Jewish state", now that you can't deny its true character?
Not trying to be confrontational, but I don't think voting matters at all. You moved there, presumably for the usual religious reasons, and you rely on the state like any other citizen. I don't expect you to change your blog title, or really to change anything if I'm being honest. But let me ask you, is the neutrality of "non" still enough of a fence for you?
What is ever the position of the Charedim that they cared about a politicians (from another party's) personal integrity? What about if the politician was a נואף or a נואפת?
I thought they viewed the Knesset the same way they viewed the Polish Parliament.
1) This is not true. Rav Shach stated explicitly in his famous speech that he would not let Degel sit with the Left because they were pork and rabbit eaters. I recall there was an actually an incident when a PM was in America and ate treif and the Charedim nearly bolted the coalition.
2) A big part of the 'heter' to sit in the Kenesset and be part of coalitions is that the hilonim are tinoq shenishba. DLs lean very heavily on this, but Charedim also. Clearly this doesn't apply to someone with a kippah.
3) Gafni has repeatedly threatened to bolt over Ben Gvir visiting the temple mount, which is completely muttar, and just a dumb Charedi pet issue.
4) Chabad messianism is one of the most important issues of our days. It's not in the geder of כי אדם אין צדיק בארץ אשר יעשה־טוב ולא יחטא it's about the survival of Judaism. There is absolutely no way Rav Shach would allow Degel to remain in the coalition after this (but admittedly, it is very unlikely he would have allowed them to joint this coalition at all).
I think there is a lot to quibble over this (for instance the "pork and rabbit eaters" in the left was a shita, as is the Har Habayis issue. Ben Gvir in 770 is more l'taiavon) but the main thing is probably that Rav Shach is not alive any longer and I think Degel is mostly running on autopilot...
Come to think of it, I think my parentheses were probably right. I doubt CHaredaim really care about a politicians personal integrity. The examples you gave were a shita. I think the story with the PM was viewed as a problem because it was part of a state visit, and even then it was probably performative.
This is similar to the many charedm in the U.S who are strongly against democrats because of their shittos to 'change the status quo' in the direction of liberalism and progressivism, despite Republicans often being deplorable in their personal life.
About 4), is it really one of the most important issues, or is it one of Maskil Bina's לשיטתיה important issues, on par with how terrible it is that chareidi batei midrashim have the Urim vTumim, Ya'aros Devash, Mesilas Yesharim/Derech Hashem, and that the Beis Yosef sometimes brings the Zohar and the Magen Avraham brings the Arizal? 😁
It is like the difference between a carcinogen and malignant cancer. The normal Charedi response is that when the cancer gets too bad, you do some chemo, but then you keep ingesting the carcinogens.
Of course, this is preferable to non-Charedim who say that cancer is no big deal, and why are you so het up about cancer.
I understand maybe half of this.
😂
You're not alone! Read the introductory chapter to Chaim Weiser's brilliant "Frumspeak: The First Dictionary of Yeshivish", entitled "Yeshivish, the Language: A Linguistic Determination of Yeshivish" (most of it is available on the Google Books preview, pp. xv-xix)
I understand enough of it to share in the disgust. These guys own a big chunk of Trump, too.
Been seeing a lot of Haredim around the White House area visiting DC lately
Ok, I’m probably stepping in deep do do by commenting here since I follow little of it. I’ll just say I’ve been to 770 a couple of times with sane Chabadniks and the ghost worshippers seemed like a small, not entirely tolerated, minority. Most Chabad are not meshichist in this way.
I've heard a lot of different things. My rough understanding is that the moderates (many of whom are only tactically moderate) lost control of 770, but still have the Ohel. But what does it matter, just don't go to either.
I'll never forget: soon after R' Berger's book came out, I had the great good fortune of sitting at the shabbos table of a very prominent, very learned, and very worldly "modernische" rav and posek, and I asked him what he thought of Berger's arguments about Chabad.
By way of answer, he spread his hands and said, "but look at all the good they do!"
This seems to have become the "party line" for all but the blackest-of-black mainstream Litvish folks.
Yes, the infamous 'but when my cousin was backpacking in Burma they gave her grape juice' clause in Hilchos Avodah Zarah.
This is all R' Norman Lamm's fault. Arguably it's really JBS who is to blame, since he could easily have put an end to Chabad infiltration of Modern Orthodoxy had he wanted to, and should have done so both based on his personal hashkafah and family background, but we can at least be דן לכף זכות for him that had he lived longer and seen what happened he would have been modeh to Rav Shach.
It's not just giving grape juice to backpackers in Burma. I know many, many frum people who've been kiruv'd by Chabad and now are shomer shabbos, keep kosher, learn Torah etc. Chabad has brought meaningful Judaism to countless lives in ways that MO, much less the yeshivish world, never did as far as I know.
Technically, Christianity has brought billions to monotheism (as well as most of the rest of the 7 mitzvos of bnei noach), and indeed Rambam gives it credit for that. Doesn't make it kosher, or not AZ.
How is it AZ if it brought all those billions to monotheism?
When you're right, you're right. Modern Orthodoxy (I hate that term, but there you have it) makes effectively no attempt at kiruv, and non-Chabad black-hat kiruv efforts peaked in the '90s (as has been amply documented elsewhere).
Chabad is pretty much the only game in town (i.e., the entire world) these days when it comes to significant Jewish outreach, and they only go from strength to strength.
Their outreach "model" of promoting affiliation and minimal mitzvah performance over rigorous observance is controversial, but their success on their own terms cannot be gainsaid.
Also, of the (many) Jews who do wind up becoming religious as a result of Chabad, I don't know of any who became a "meshichist".
This right here, Chabad was the only game in town for most places I went (before and as a Chabadnik).
It wasn't til I got the opportunity to see the rest of the world that I drifted from their grasp because it was more and more apparent and difficult to ignore the discrepancy in their practice vis a vis the books and what I started seeing others doing that were "equally as religious".
>I don't know many who became...
I do :/ Far too many.
I know, man, I know! I'm not saying I agree, just telling you the metzius.
Although perhaps it should count for something that folks of the stature of R' Lamm, R' Soloveitchik, and the guy I mentioned (who, as you may have intuited, was a talmid of both) *declined* to condemn them?
Come on, rabbi Soloveitchik actively supported the Chabad Rebbe because of his background (having had a chabad melamed) and his brother wrote an infamous letter of 'support' for the meshichistin
OK, maybe you're right. I won't be dan lechaf zechus.
(that said, as a misnaged-ben-misnagdim, I have no inclination to either frequent the so-called "Ohel" nor visit 770... except perhaps as a matter of historical curiosity, as one might visit Westminster Abbey)
I had some meaningful moments in both places.
Well, actually in Westminster Abbey as well. . . .
I have no doubt. But our host, the blog owner, would argue that "meaningful moments" are no heter for visiting a place of "avodah zarah" (no more than he would countenance visiting a church like Westminster Abbey, I suspect).
Yeah, but I'm not accepting that Chabad is "Avodah Zarah" because a. it's only some Chabad who see the Rebbe as actually Moshiach as opposed to having been or even being a "potential Mosiach." and b. because, Rambam notwithstanding--and I am a fan of his--I do not accept that Christianity is Avodah Zarah. Really, if you want to be a purist, every version of Judaism I've seen has some elements of superstition that could be considered AZ, whether it's collecting Rabbi cards, visiting graves, or covering your open water containers at night. . . but I haven't been to Lakewood, so maybe they're above all that. . . .
I couldn't agree more with everything you just said 👍
Incidentally, I think *all* the superstitious nonsense that has no basis in Torah/halachah—including everything you mentioned—should be expurgated from legitimate Judaism. (This is one reason I like R' Natan Slifkin's stuff so much.)
Ben Gvir received a "Rebbe is Moshiach" starter kit.
"Ben-Gvir is married to Ayala Nimrodi, a distant relative of Ofer Nimrodi, the former owner of the Maariv daily newspaper.[8] They met around 2002 when Nimrodi was 15 and Ben-Gvir was 26[7] and married in 2004.[86] Reportedly, the couple visited the grave of Baruch Goldstein, a mass murderer, on their first date.[7][87][88]"
What a chud.
It's literally as if Nick Fuentes was in charge of the police. Except that Nick Fuentes does a better job of pretending to be a religious Catholic.
Looks even worse when you realize that Nick is limited by the fact that he has to pretend to be both religious and straight.
Nick hates.Jews more than Ben Gvir hates Arabs.
Imagine if Nick Fuentes took his fiance (OK, I know a stretch, but imagine) to the grave of Robert Gregory Bowers on their first date. Even groypers would be like 'bro, what?'.
Nick with a fiance!? Never. Unless a catboi
You're quoting from Wikipedia and you're proud of yourself?
Yes.
😂
He might have done well to edit out the Wikipedia footnote numbers, but is anything in that quotation factually incorrect?
I'm a Lubavitcher, so I thought other readers might be interested in an insider perspective on this new group of people our good host has introduced to so many of you.
Perhaps not shockingly, I strongly disagree with this characterization of my people. There is some truth here, but it's pretty unfairly twisted and exaggerated, the usual fruits of arrogance>ignorance>contempt.
Starting with the concessions:
Yes, there are some pretty over-the-top, plausibly avodah-zarah engaging people within Chabad-Lubavitch. Yes these elements have captured some important physical territory, the main shul in our HQ building. (How this happened is a long and sad story, but it mostly comes down to a leadership vacuum post the rebbe's passing in '94 and New York State being really bad at enabling landlords to evict unlawful tenants and trespassers.)
But these people really are a minority. How small is hard to say, because some off this stuff is on a spectrum in a way that's really hard to explain to an outsider not versed in our theology, but the people who believe and practice things that are indefensible to eighty-plus percent of normative Orthodox Judaism make up not more than 5% of the movement. Unfortunately, their extremism coupled with our decentralized leadership post the Rebbe's passing has meant that we have been unable to eject them from the movement or retake the physical 770 building from them. (We did get them to stop "tunneling" though! Small victories).
But Chabad as a whole today sits squarely within the Jewish mainstream. We are in many ways the most dynamic and active group in the world (Pew research found that 38% of American Jews have interacted or regularly interact with Chabad), and we do a lot to improve the material and spiritual welfare of hundreds of thousands of Jews around the globe (Israel's biggest food bank/soup kitchen is a multi-hundred year old Chabad charity organization, for example).
Contrary to what our host has said or implied in this piece and in the comments, there are vanishingly few Orthodox Jews whose issues with Chabad rise to a level where they would not, for example, eat our food, use our mikvaos, trust our kiddushin and gittin, accept our geirim, trust our safrus, cooperate with our Battei Dinim, etc. He may wish it were otherwise, but that is the reality today.
First of all, I appreciate the respectful response. Secondly, while I understand that you find this upsetting, I do not believe you are actually disagreeing with me about the pertinent facts namely (i) a certain proportion of Chabad are heretics, (ii) they have taken over 770 (iii) they invited and hosted Ben Gvir (iv) Ben Gvir was party to their public expression of heresy and this is all on camera. I would therefore think that you would be even more appalled than me since not only is Ben Gvir affirming heresy, he is also - according to you - soiling unjustly the name of your movement.
However, with all that said, you are either delusional or deliberately stating untruths. The vast majority of Chabad chassidim in Israel are Moshachists, and this alone means that your 5% is preposterous. However, even in America, 5% is clearly not true. My advice to you is simply to leave Chabad. Judaism did fine without either Chabad for thousands of years, and it would do fine without Chabad now. However, if you want to remain in your movement, your energies are more properly employed not in telling me that everything is fine, but in combatting the heresy within your own movement so that I no longer have anything to object to.
I will close with a story. In the first week after Oct 7th, I was volunteering on an army base, and a Chabadnik was handing out copies of תפילת הדרך, with the face of your dead Rebbe and the word משיח on them. I was tired and a bit emotional, so I was less phlegmatic than usual and gave it to him. He told me that he wasn't a Moshiachist, but that he didn't have any other copies of tefilas haderech to hand out. TBH, I think he was just lying, but this nevertheless, I think this illustrates quite well the attitude of moderate Chabadniks. Sure, you are not personally a heretic, but you don't object to it, and you'd prefer I was a heretic than a normal not-Chabad Jew. So fix that.
Believing that the Rebbe is mashiach is lunacy, not heresy. No, not even a safek heresy. So that is not germane to the percentage of heretical Chabadnics.
First off, minor note, the correct phonetic spelling would be "Mechichist", Chabad's Russian-accented havara pronounces Moshiach as "Meshiach" unless the speaker/reader is taking care.
Second, I didn't engage with your main thrust because I don't really care about it. Ben Gvir is your lunatic, you deal with him, I have plenty of my own to deal with here. I also think you'd be pleased (or disappointed to have your stereotype undermined) to know that a Chabad House invited Ben Gvir to speak and then canceled on him after the main Shluchim office intervened. (Why did the Chabad House invite him in the first place? Because he's an Israeli minister and most shluchim don't know enough about Israeli politics to know that this is not the kind of Israeli minister you can have speaking to your diverse crowd at your fundraiser or student event).
I am not worried about being soiled, because Chabad's reputation is not made in the media but in the tens of thousands of daily interactions Jews of all walks of life have with us. We'll avoid bad press if we can, but this is not something we stress about.
As for me being delusional or speaking untruths, I would start with defining the "Heretics". As I alluded to, there is a spectrum, and in my opinion there are flavors of Meshichist thought and practice that are merely wrongheaded, not heretical. So by my own definition, I think I'm being very fair and accurate.
And Judaism would do fine without Chabad? Without Chabad there would be tens of thousands of fewer Jews living G-dly, observant lives, and hundreds of thousands fewer who had any connection to G-d and their heritage at all. Also probably just fewer Jews existing period, considering how many Jew-Jew marriages Chabad has facilitated and encouraged over the years. Seems pretty not fine to me.
Regarding your story, sounds plausible. Your takeaway, that this illustrates the "moderate Chabad" position is also accurate, though not for the reasons you think. Us moderates deal with you nudniks all the time and the juice is usually just not worth the squeeze trying to explain ourselves, unless it's happening in particular favorable circumstances. This stuff is complicated, it's a live issue for us, and the people asking questions usually have very piquant opinions and a strong conviction that they know all they need to know on the subject.
“Us moderates deal with you nudniks all the time and the juice is usually just not worth the squeeze trying to explain ourselves, unless it's happening in particular favorable circumstances. This stuff is complicated, it's a live issue for us, and the people asking questions usually have very piquant opinions and a strong conviction that they know all they need to know on the subject.”
Unfortunately, this is the kind of conversation stopper that people hear all the time from lots of quarters in lots of contexts, and it never is very good in encouraging trust.
By the way, I’m not taking sides in this between the two of you; vibe-wise neither of you convinces my secular soul all that much. But just a thought that if we want to interact more constructively across all the divides - and broadly speaking, yes I think we have to - I don’t think your approach here is optimal. (I’m not sure mine is either but figured I’d give it a shot.)
I'm sure it's not optimal, it's also not even correct from the standpoint of the ideals of the Chabad movement. It's just the reality of what we deal with and the kind of conditioned response it generates in many of us.
Genius of chabad is making themselves indispensable to Jewish travellers so they can't be ostracized.
I kid, I kid.
No need to kid, I think this has definitely been a major contributing factor in changing the larger Jewish world's perception of Chabad
I reckon a great majority of Chareidim view idolatry as extinct - you know, Menashe did it, but since then the yetzer for it is gone, and Hinduism is just a pale imitation, Christianity is only guilty of a technicality (tziruf), and with Chabad, let’s let sleeping dogs lie.
You are right, of course - that per rambam, allying with Bibi is even worse than an idolator. At least the anti Eretz Hakodesh faction got that right.
Also, F for your gentile readers. This isn’t pidgin, it’s inside baseball.
Gentile readers need to understand just this much, and it's pretty simple really. The highly political global organization run out of 770 has a well-earned bad reputation among other religious Jews due to their, well... let's say "lacksadaisical" attitude toward the 1st Commandment, which is a pretty big deal in Judaism no matter how you slice it. It was bad enough when their rebbe was still walking the earth, but it's gotten much worse since.
Jewish readers need to understand at least this much: the Gentiles are already judging you based on the actions of these guys, because they can't tell the difference. Not judging the idol worship and heresy, about which they could care less. Rather, judging the political sponsorship and manipulation and dirty tricks. If you fail to repudiate them, you are in the same handbasket, and absolutely deserve the same fate.
Yeah, on your second point, I agree. I often try to point out to fellow Jews that we'd expect a moderate Muslim to condemn Islamic terrorism, and if they don't, we consider them one and the same - and so it's no surprise of gentiles expect the same standard of us. But very few grok it.
I think the current generation (boomers) of Jewish powerbrokers are stuck in this pattern, but have hope that the upcoming generations will act differently.
I understand the argument. I just don't think that supporting Islamic conquest of the world or very large parts of it is the same as fighting back against Arabs who want to expel you from your home.
Tell me more about Chabad's reputation for "political sponsorship, manipulation, and dirty tricks". As a Lubavitcher, I confess that this is an angle of attack I haven't heard much about before.
The big Modern Orthodox synagogue in Stamford where I grew up has an Israeli flag and an American flag flanking the ark. Not the best. but I get it. But atop the American flag - which people face during the Amidah, bowing and bending towards it - there is a golden eagle.
Not a great look... 😬
I have beaten many levels of the Philosemitisch game on a Brown Man playthrough, but I got fucked by this one, I'm not gonna lie
😂😂😂
I had to look up "Brown Man playthrough", but enormously clever comment!
As I did the good Scottish gentleman above, I would refer you to the introductory chapter to Chaim Weiser's brilliant "Frumspeak: The First Dictionary of Yeshivish", entitled "Yeshivish, the Language: A Linguistic Determination of Yeshivish" (most of it is available on the Google Books preview, pp. xv-xix).
That, or spend a few years in yehsivah and the "sprache" comes naturally. Indeed, to this day, I find some terms/thoughts/concepts inexpressible in English.
Shprach
Not sprache
Sctḧprakcḧ! This is the pesaq!
Pronounced “shprach”, but spelled “sprache” (especially as I surmise our friend Mahin is more familiar with German than with Yiddish).
No one yeshivish spells it sprache except a Harry like you.
I have never in a trillion years heard the term "Harry"; had to look it up, but I suppose it's shayach 🤷♂️
Incidentally, I wasn't aware that there was a standard orthography of yeshivish. But again, as I doubt the average bochur would use a term like "Philosemitisch", I'm choshesh that Mahin (who appears, rather, to be a DPhil candidate in divinity) is more practiced in German than Yiddish, so my kavanah in spelling it as I did was to avoid looking like an ignoramus in his eyes (by misspelling what is, after all, a German loanword).
If you have to look it up then farshteytzich you are a Harry. There's no bigger rayah.
Is it really hard for you to understand why we want to kill our Arab enemies but are more lenient regarding mistaken Jewish brethren? Are you really so stupid, or do you just hate your fellow Jews that much? You'll never be one percent of the man Yishai Fleisher is.
Drawing a line between Chabad's Rebbe worship and right-wing zionism is a peculiar take.
Many Rebbes and Decisively non-Zionist Rabbanim visit 770 all the time.
Tacit acceptance of Chabad's excesses is hardly a zionist issue
Who are these Rebbes and non-Zionist Rabbanim who visit 770?
They're the Vizhnitz, Naroler, Kretchnif, Ger Rebbes, etc or their sons.
First of all, Naroler and Kretchnif do not count. Much respect for knowing about tiny fringe chassiduses, but that's it. (Parenthetically, google tells me the Narole Rebbe's son is Osher Shapiro who is a famous 'character' in Stamford Hill).
Secondly, it was Menachem Mendel Hager who visited 770, and he is well known for starting his own messianic cult known as the Mendelisten, who have been rightly ostracised after the very disturbing details of what they do came to light. So maybe he was there to take notes. It is is a very serious libel against Vizhnitz to try and associate them with this.
So that leaves Ger, which makes sense, since they are another group on the fringes of Charedi Judaism, utterly despised by everyone, but able to push everyone around because of their money, power and disregard for moral boundaries. They also kidnap children of families who try to leave, so maybe the Gerer Rebbe's son was there to give advice on this.
So to conclude, whatever else you may say about Charedim, they are to be congratulated for maintaining the firewall against Chabad heresy, in total contrast to Right Wing Zionists who actively court it and are totally infiltrated by it.
(P.S. After googling it, I see that the Kretchnif Rebbe didn't even step foot in the schul, he just visited the library).
Wow, very comprehensive rebuttal.
Can someone explain to me like a I'm retard what specifically is the avoda zara here? Believing that some Rabbi was the mashiah? The weird new rituals? Or is it the content of those rituals?
The ghost worship is similar a chair for Eliyahu hanavi on Pesach so it doesn't seem that outlandish to me.
1) The term Avodah Zarah means strange worship, not more not less. Any form of worship not sanctioned by Jewish tradition or law falls into this category. The term itself is taken from the אש זרה brought by Nadav and Avihu, the issue with which was simply its uncommanded status. Of course, idol worship is a type of Avodah Zarah, and one for which someone who violates it is liable to death, but the allegation of Avodah Zarah itself is not an allegation of idol worship.
2) There are 2 important differences between MMS and Eliyahu haNavi. (1) Sefer Melachim states that Eliyahu haNavi never died whereas MMS did, in fact, die. (2) Sefer Malachi says that Eliyahu haNavi will return, and this belief is repeated throughout Rabbinic sources. To make an analogy, praying towards the temple is not AZ, in fact it is halacha, but praying towards Mecca is AZ. They are both buildings, but that is not the point.
3) The practice of putting out a chair for Eliyahu haNavi is dubious. Its earliest source is a post-talmudic midrash Pirkei d'Rabi Eliezer, which contains no small amount of dubious content. It's popularity today is largely a function of the Zohar, which contains almost nothing except dubious content. I would prefer it not be done, and I do not do it if I can avoid it. However, we have an important rule which is נכרים שבחוצה לארץ לאו עובדי עבודת זרה הן אלא מנהג אבותיהן בידיהן. Though this rule does not strictly apply to Jews, something of the principle does, namely that if they do something that they received by tradition, even if it of bad origin, or is bad by nature, they are not guilty as if they came up with it. Thus what is fundamentally wrong with Chabad is that they are constantly inventing new forms of worship, constantly trying to encourage others to participate and that they do it not because of tradition but because they believe doing so will bring the geulah.
4) With that said, if Eliyahu's Seat was in fact mishnaic law, practiced by all the tanaim and amoraim, and it was used by heretics today to justify new innovations the correct thing to do would be to cancel the practice. The prototype for this is King Hizkiyahu's destruction of the brazen serpent and there are many other examples, such as the prohibition on those who are particular to pray without shoes, or wearing only white as appears in the Mishnah.
1a) This is an idiosyncratic definition. The way Avoda Zara used in the Gemara, halacha, and common parlance, it's a synonym for idol worship. When you use it for something other than idol worship, it doesn't have the same incriminatory implications.
1b) I wonder how you define "strange worship". Like, I see waiting for the Rebbe's ghost to walk out the door as strange worship, that is, a new practice that nobody ever did. But what about a farbrengen? What about a kumsitz? What about finishing Shas in an hour, a new type of fundraising activity I have seen recently. I don't think it has much limud HaTorah value, but is it "strange worship"? What about singing Shabbos zemiros? What about piyutim in shul? How long must things exist before they pass the threshhold of "strange worship"? The Gemara says that Ezra was מתקן ברכות. Without getting into the weeds about how historical this statement is or was intended, if he really did that, would it be an innovative strange worship? For that matter, I can ask about Purim and Chanuka...
4) Amazing! I don't agree with a lot of what you say but you hit it on the nose with this! Unfortunately we don't have real leadership.
You are correct. I learned this peirush on Avodah Zarah from Shabtai Ben Dov via my teachers, but you are correct that it is clearly untenable in light of how the term is actually used in primary sources. As I often say, at least 50% of intellectual progress is not learning new things, but unlearning the wrong things you learned already.
However, I don't think you go far enough. In the Mishnah, the terms is used consistently, not to refer to idol worship, but the idol itself, or a temple, or sometimes a deity. It's not a gerund, but a normal noun. The term עובד עודה זרה doesn't mean 'does avodah zarah', but 'serves an avodah zarah'. In gemara, the term is used in this way too, but also as a gerund, maybe as an ellipsis of עבודת עבודה זרה (and perhaps the reason it is elided it because that sounds kind of naff).
Another point that I try to impress on people is that technical language in TSPB needs to be understood based on how it is used (or, if you are lucky, defined), not on the semantics of the term in ordinary speech. But obviously I failed to take note of that klal in this case.
Now, that's not to say I think the general point I was making is wrong, but clearly AZ is the wrong terminology to use to make it, and I have emended the article accordingly.
Very interesting answer, thank you. Though I think a more accurate translation of זרה would be 'foreign' not 'stange'.
You're welcome. but see above.
It's a spectrum. Some Chabadskers say he is an embodiment of God and pray to him. That's for sure AZ. Others say his ghost is the Mashiach and they "commune" with him which sounds uncomfortably close to Christianity, although I'm not sure why it would technically be AZ. Suppose a sect of Christians that believe Jesus is the Messiah but not God Himself (and there are such sects), would that be AZ? But I can see it maybe being אביזרייהו.
J's witnesses and Unitarians are this. It's not even אביזרייהו and technically one can enter their houses of worship, only reason not to is maris ayin.
Curious if you eat from any hechsherim...
I'm kind of unclear as to why you draw the line with messhichistim, and why you expect Jewish political parties in Israel to do the same thing. UTJ thinks Bibi is a menuval u'mkah schchin too - but that doesn't stop them from loyally supporting him to the extent they think he will support their moisdos. I guess on a strictly halachic level kfirah is worse than cheating on your wives, but UTJ thinks every chiloni is a kofer.
And from a religious zionist perspective, the whole movement is based on the idea that you can engage in partnership with kofrim to bring about a greater good - yishuv eretz yisrael. If they thought it would allow them to build one more outpost, they would name it Yechi Adonenu.
The official position of UTJ is that Bibi is tinoq shenishba, or, if not, he's merely a מומר אוכל נבילות לתיאבון. Of course, that's kind of nonsensical given how many of them will sing בנימין ידיד השם, but that is at least their official position. Clearly, this does not apply to Ben Gvir because (a) he's 'religious' and (b) you can't be מומר עובד עבודה זרה לתיאבון
As for DLs, yeah, they have this insane theology, but it's specifically supposed to apply to atheists, not heretics.
Fact is, if this happened in a church, there would be no discussion about what to do. And this should be no different.
When you say that's their official position, what do you mean? Where could I find it?
Isn't at least secular zionism a form of kefirah to UTJ?
There is a book בעיות זמן by R. Refael Reuvain Grozovsky, which provides the conceptual basis for the Aguda participating in Israel politics.
https://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=41396&st=&pgnum=1&hilite=
Now, of course, it goes without saying that basically all of the boundaries that the Agudists said they would respect have not been respected. But that doesn't mean that I can't protest when they violate another one.
So people in EY (other than Reb Berel Soloveitchik's rebetzin) actually do know about that sefer?
I think R Kotler was being dishonest when saying that this is the basis for the Aguda participating in Israel politics.
Either way, it's been any years since I read it, but I never understood hisnuse of aveira lishma. Doesn't that go against the first principle of Nefesh Hachaim Judaism?
I think the real underpinning of Charedi Judaism is that their 2 greatest manhigim, the Chazon Ish (mostly in his letters to Reb Elchonon Wasserman) and Reb Chaim Ozer (in a long letter discussing the famous machlokes between RSRH and Rav Bamberger and stating that it was just a pragmatic machlokes) had a very pragmatical view of the issur hischabrus l'rshaim.
'I think R Kotler was being dishonest when saying that this is the basis for the Aguda participating in Israel politics.'
This I was not expecting.
Why? This is really an oft-quoted sefer in EY? I really thought that probably few people in EY knew much about Reb Reuvain.
Well, you can protest, but perhaps the fact you're all het up about this particular one shows that you're just using it as a convenient cudgel with which to bash Zionoids with.
I don't know what this even means in context of the above discussion. However, to respond to the implicit allegation, my views on Chabad messianism have not changed one iota in ten years. All that has changed is that I have become aware of how much it has penetrated religious Zionism, something that I was totally unaware of when I made aliyah. Some people, who I could name, used to consider this a red line, but the second Ben Gvir endorsed it, it's no longer a red line, because, in fact, their only red line is deflating their Bar Kochba fantasies.
I'll elaborate. I am not implying that your view of Chabad has changed, only that your demand that all of Ben Gvir's political allies, and specifically the Chareidim who are in coalition with him, now must abandon and condemn him due to his fraternisation with meshichsitim, seems to be disingenuous.
For as you correctly point out, Chareidim should've fled when Bibi ate pork too, or when Amir Ohana joined the fray or whatever. They didn't, because they hypocrites. I'm simply noting that you're less lathered up by that betrayal, and seem to be more het up by this one, because it happens to fit into a Current Thing you have going against Kahanoids.
Trying to explain this to someone who doesn't seem to understand that it's avodah zarah? Is there any easy, quick primer? (Aside from *that book*)
Lenzner says the Rebbe, King Moshiach is 'present here today' and that 'he gives strength to the world'. Since, literally speaking, he is buried in the ground, they must be referring to his resurrected spirit or somesuch, which they then address by saying 'Our Lord ... lives, king Moshiach forever'. What about that is *not* Avodah Zarah?
There are halachik parameters to AZ, not every act of lunacy qualifies.
Thinking someone who is dead is resuscitated in spirit is not something which falls in that category as far as I’m aware.
Nor is believing in someone as the messiah considered AZ.
Referring to him as “Lord” might do it, but אדוננו is and has been used in regards to mortal beings by many people as an honorific.
Yeah that's what I mean by ספק עבודה זרה לקולא. Sure, if you want to rely on this kind of reasoning to still your conscience about not arsoning the local Chabad House, then fine, but obviously this isn't an argument to participate or condone in any way this behaviour. Just, like, don't go to 770. Not hard.
Serious question from a Halachic POV - is it, though? I mean, there are serious poskim who say Christianity isn’t AZ, and that is much more overt.
Is considering a dead person as alive AZ? Is addressing them as Lord, AZ? Or do they have to engage in a halachically defined mode of worship?
I know that there is a minute faction of chabad who have gone the whole caboodle and say the Rebbe is a ‘cheilek Elokim mimaal’ or something like that, and there are some who pray to him based on the ludicrous notion of ‘tzaddik goizer v’HKBH mekayeim’ - but I’m still curious as to a formal, sober Halachic analysis.
AZ is just an umbrella term for forbidden worship, like מאכלים אסורים. If it's worship and it's forbidden it's Avodah Zarah. You can argue about what the onesh is in a certain case is, but that's different.
As for Christianity, no-one permits it to Jews, indeed the original heter from Tosefos (which doesn't actually mean what it is often quoted as saying) says explicitly דבני נח לא הוזהרו על כך. So if you want to argue that Chabad is like Christianity, then it is still Avodah Zarah, but a goy who does it doesn't have the din of an עובד עבודה זרה.
R Ahron Feldman has a teshuva where he concludes it is not.
Rav Feldman's teshuvos on this are really classic examples of the one-way enforcement of Maimonidean orthodoxy. Anyone who deviates in the direction of 'rationalism' is treif automatically because of13 ikarrim, case closed, but anyone who deviates in the direction of paganism is presumed kosher unless they literally say 'this man is God and I worship him'.
And then we wonder how Judaism became a religion for imbeciles.
i never read the teshuva but your response is devoid of content. It seems you are just passuling off the bat anyone who takes the 13 ikarim seriously.
What does that mean? I said that the 13 ikkarim are enforced against people who deviate from them in the direction of rationalism, but that whenever anyone deviates from them in the direction of paganism, the excuse-making comes out. I think they should be enforced equally in both directions.
I haven't read them, but there is a logic to the double standard - Slifkinesque rationalism is seductive and insidious, so must be strongly condemned, whilst Chabad messianism is neither of those two, so less a target.
Also, it's likely all polemical anyways - in reality, regular american Chareidim will eat OU hechscher just like they will eat and pray at Chabad of Hong Kong when travelling.
שאני מינות דמשכא
Which hechserim are really makpid not to use any Lubavitchers?
So much to discuss. links between radical settler, kahanists and Chabad are stronger than ppl realise. Rabbis like wolpo (first to declare the Rebbe moshiach) (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shalom_Dov_Wolpo#SOS_Israel), nonzionism's favourite (😅) rav Ginsburg who runs od Yosef chai and provides much of the ideology behind the hilltop youth (including their leader meir ettinger who is related to kahana) https://newvoices.org/2008/09/23/0001-4/
שם רשעים ירקב
Oi mate, chassidus is weird. That's why the phrase "misnagdim" used to mean something. Personally I think stupid chair pushing rituals and tunneling are better than brawling and sex abuse. But maybe I'm just not nonzionism pilled enough.
All 3 are the same stupid, though. Avodah Zarah, giluy Arayos, Shfichas damim.
Maybe , or maybe it's just sinas Chinam.
Who can forget that famous passage from Jeremiah when G-d said to prophecy unto the people to forsake their abominations, and Jeremiah said to G-d 'why are you being all fussy, they mean well' and G-d said 'you're right, what we need is Jewish Pride 🇮🇱💪'?
How am I supposed to know what it says in Nach? I'm not a girl.
I must, however, have missed the braisa where any upward limit was established on the kavod that can be given to one's rebbe, during or after his life.
I'm assuming you are joking here. Ignoring whether or not this is Avoda Zara (it probably is) this will never be denounced in a million years. These guys are hardcore og Otzma Yehudit voters. A large part of the sefardi Otzma guys just tune out the craziness while loving Chabad.
His voters are נמשל כבהמות נדמו. I mean the other religious parties. Gafni and Smotritch must announce today that they will not sit in a government with Ben Gvir, and they must threaten to leave the government, and do so if necessary. Anything else is completely discrediting.
You know perfectly well that won't happen. But how will your own attitude change when they continue to look the other way? What does it mean to you to live in a "Jewish state", now that you can't deny its true character?
I do not vote, and it says NonZionism right there in the title.
Not trying to be confrontational, but I don't think voting matters at all. You moved there, presumably for the usual religious reasons, and you rely on the state like any other citizen. I don't expect you to change your blog title, or really to change anything if I'm being honest. But let me ask you, is the neutrality of "non" still enough of a fence for you?
Yes. Apart from anything else, everybody's gotta be somewhere.
What is ever the position of the Charedim that they cared about a politicians (from another party's) personal integrity? What about if the politician was a נואף or a נואפת?
I thought they viewed the Knesset the same way they viewed the Polish Parliament.
1) This is not true. Rav Shach stated explicitly in his famous speech that he would not let Degel sit with the Left because they were pork and rabbit eaters. I recall there was an actually an incident when a PM was in America and ate treif and the Charedim nearly bolted the coalition.
2) A big part of the 'heter' to sit in the Kenesset and be part of coalitions is that the hilonim are tinoq shenishba. DLs lean very heavily on this, but Charedim also. Clearly this doesn't apply to someone with a kippah.
3) Gafni has repeatedly threatened to bolt over Ben Gvir visiting the temple mount, which is completely muttar, and just a dumb Charedi pet issue.
4) Chabad messianism is one of the most important issues of our days. It's not in the geder of כי אדם אין צדיק בארץ אשר יעשה־טוב ולא יחטא it's about the survival of Judaism. There is absolutely no way Rav Shach would allow Degel to remain in the coalition after this (but admittedly, it is very unlikely he would have allowed them to joint this coalition at all).
I think there is a lot to quibble over this (for instance the "pork and rabbit eaters" in the left was a shita, as is the Har Habayis issue. Ben Gvir in 770 is more l'taiavon) but the main thing is probably that Rav Shach is not alive any longer and I think Degel is mostly running on autopilot...
Come to think of it, I think my parentheses were probably right. I doubt CHaredaim really care about a politicians personal integrity. The examples you gave were a shita. I think the story with the PM was viewed as a problem because it was part of a state visit, and even then it was probably performative.
This is similar to the many charedm in the U.S who are strongly against democrats because of their shittos to 'change the status quo' in the direction of liberalism and progressivism, despite Republicans often being deplorable in their personal life.
About 4), is it really one of the most important issues, or is it one of Maskil Bina's לשיטתיה important issues, on par with how terrible it is that chareidi batei midrashim have the Urim vTumim, Ya'aros Devash, Mesilas Yesharim/Derech Hashem, and that the Beis Yosef sometimes brings the Zohar and the Magen Avraham brings the Arizal? 😁
It is like the difference between a carcinogen and malignant cancer. The normal Charedi response is that when the cancer gets too bad, you do some chemo, but then you keep ingesting the carcinogens.
Of course, this is preferable to non-Charedim who say that cancer is no big deal, and why are you so het up about cancer.
As long as Chabadskers and their seforim are not infiltrating mainstream yeshivos, the chareidim are not ingesting that particular carcinogen, no?