Topic Wiki
Topic Wiki
ExGingi posted link to an interview (full text copied here) with Rabbi Zushe Posner (who has been an educator for over 50 years) in English version of the Beis Moshiach magazine. Rabbi Posner unique style, of demanding of himself (and others) intellectual honesty, even when it gets uncomfortable was dubbed truth shock jock by gozalim.
In response to the OP, Yard sale asserted it to be "Undiluted kefira". In response to an inquiry by ExGingi, Yard sale brought two quotes from the interview to ostensibly prove his point, but brought no argument as to why said statements would qualify as "Undiluted kefira". ExGingi asked if his claim is because he believes that Tzimtzum is to be interpreted literally (צמצום כפשוטו). To which Yard sale tried to argue that "above quote is clearly not referring to Tzimtzum dilo kipshshuto the way ein sof is extant in you, me, and my pet rabbit. It is clearly referring to the Rebbe specifically in a unique way, as is evident from the continuation of the article."
As to the second quote ostensibly claimed to be Kefira, some tried to explain what a Rebbe is, while ExGingi disclaimed all such explanations quoting from the interview "...if I could explain it, well then that’s not a Rebbe." While for the first quote ExGingi offered a simplistic English explanation saying that "Once we understand ... that עולם is a concealment of the true being, then if something (or someone) is less of a concealment, then the true being appears "more present" in it (or through it)."
At a certain point Yard sale seemed to start retreating or slightly mellow down the tone from his original statement/accusation.
At that point doodle interjected in response to ExGingi's quote that we cannot really explain the situation, positing that "Or you were plain wrong . The Rebbe is not Moshiach. He never said he was anyway . It would have been amazing if he was , but he wasn’t ... Intellectual honesty and openness of thought is important."
ExGingi being always ready for an honest intellectual challenge (though not always having the time for a timely response) fully agrees with the demand for Intellectual Honesty (later claiming that this might be the main point Rabbi Posner was actually trying to bring across in the interview) and followed up with the challenges:
doodle jumped right at the first challenge, asking whether ExGingi "say(s) the Rebbe said he's moshiach? If yes, from where?" to which ExGingi responds that he is unaware of the explicit words being ever said by the Rebbe, but claims a propensity of material authorized for publication by the Rebbe implies that it would be intellectually dishonest to say that "the Rebbe "never said he was"."
chinagel requested clarification from ExGingi whether he is "of the opinion that the Rebbe held he was moshiach? Do you still think he must be moshiach?" To which ExGingi's terse response was "yes and yes".
In an interesting twist, Yard sale himself then brought a Hebrew quote that offers the same explanation that ExGingi offered earlier to the עצמות ומהות מלובש בגוף statement.
Dan decided to interject with a link to Wikipedia (which was then quoted by Yard sale) alleging that the Rebbe clearly told a journalist that he is not Moshiach, and that said interchange is recorded. [said "proof" is quoted by Wikipedia referencing an exchange between Tomer Persiko and Rabbi Chaim Rapoport, Persiko (who isn't quoted in current thread) offers a response to Rabbi Rapoport, but rather than going that route ExGingi, being honest and open minded searched for same recording to no avail, and challenged all to come up with it. chbochur reports that he inquired with various contacts at JEMedia (which Rabbi Rapoport alleges holds such recording) and none seem to be aware of such, he then reached out to Rabbi Rapoport himself who said he needs to dig it up, we patiently await it.]
With a few more questions thrown about, to which others might have offered some responses, at a certain point ExGingi said that he is "waiting for responses to my questions/inquiries before I publicly respond to others."
After some noisy nonsense introduced by none other than our dear friend CBC (what a surprise) who was given undue credibility by aygart, Yehuda57 offered a response to the ostensibly Kefira statement brought in the interview "if the Rebbe, G-d forbid … then we can stop putting on t’fillin, chalila". Yehuda57's response has several parts, first and foremost he asks whether "those people stop putting on tefillin?" And then went on to say that "perhaps there is just a slight chance they were saying extreme things as "shock jocks" in order to make a seperate point which may or may not have been excusable in context but appears blasphemous typed out coldly 30 years later?" after some additional noise from CBC and followup by aygart, Yehuda57 added that "if you are working on a premise that it is possible a Lubavitcher could believe that any reason at all is enough to make him stop putting on tefillin, then we have nothing to discuss."
When aygart responded to that with pleasure in finding out that said premise is flawed, he asked "how is one supposed to take such a statement?" ExGingi replied with an allegation that accepting such a baffling statement כפשוטו when referring to people whom you know to be שומרי תומ"צ, indicates a lack of Yiras Shomayim. While Yehuda57 went into a little more detail and another example, stating that if on'es "baseline, like others here, is that Chabad = kefira, no amount of contextualizing will change that, to the point that you could absurdly say Chabad hides their true beliefs."
After some more noise, the בעל אכסניא offered his regular english explanation of the עצמות ומהות מלובש בגוף statement, while separately making disparaging comments about the magazine where it was quoted. A third time must have been the charm, along with a disparaging comment about the source by Dan, and seemingly נחה דעתו of R' Yard sale.
After some additional back and forth noise regarding various "factions" within Lubavitch, Yard sale gave the thread an interesting turn, acknowledging that "It’s easy to smugly look down on others but the Litvaks have their own problems; last I checked צפיה לישועהis also one of the י״ג עיקרים yet few of them take moshiach seriously. Sure we give lip service to the idea multiple times a day, but who is really interested in giving up all the good stuff we have here? It’s like some foreign concept that most of us espouse מן השפה ולחוץ." Dan made some serious allegations about how he heard friends in non-Chabad school talking and from there discussion went OT about school vs home education, including proper attitude towards emphasis of שכר ועונש and attitude towards non-Jews.
In response to the OP, Yard sale asserted it to be "Undiluted kefira". In response to an inquiry by ExGingi, Yard sale brought two quotes from the interview to ostensibly prove his point, but brought no argument as to why said statements would qualify as "Undiluted kefira". ExGingi asked if his claim is because he believes that Tzimtzum is to be interpreted literally (צמצום כפשוטו). To which Yard sale tried to argue that "above quote is clearly not referring to Tzimtzum dilo kipshshuto the way ein sof is extant in you, me, and my pet rabbit. It is clearly referring to the Rebbe specifically in a unique way, as is evident from the continuation of the article."
As to the second quote ostensibly claimed to be Kefira, some tried to explain what a Rebbe is, while ExGingi disclaimed all such explanations quoting from the interview "...if I could explain it, well then that’s not a Rebbe." While for the first quote ExGingi offered a simplistic English explanation saying that "Once we understand ... that עולם is a concealment of the true being, then if something (or someone) is less of a concealment, then the true being appears "more present" in it (or through it)."
At a certain point Yard sale seemed to start retreating or slightly mellow down the tone from his original statement/accusation.
At that point doodle interjected in response to ExGingi's quote that we cannot really explain the situation, positing that "Or you were plain wrong . The Rebbe is not Moshiach. He never said he was anyway . It would have been amazing if he was , but he wasn’t ... Intellectual honesty and openness of thought is important."
ExGingi being always ready for an honest intellectual challenge (though not always having the time for a timely response) fully agrees with the demand for Intellectual Honesty (later claiming that this might be the main point Rabbi Posner was actually trying to bring across in the interview) and followed up with the challenges:
- "How well versed are you in the Rebbe's talks and writings (to be able to say that he "never said he was")?
- How well versed are you in the topics of גאולה and משיח from Jewish sources? From Chassidus? From the Rebbe's teachings?"
doodle jumped right at the first challenge, asking whether ExGingi "say(s) the Rebbe said he's moshiach? If yes, from where?" to which ExGingi responds that he is unaware of the explicit words being ever said by the Rebbe, but claims a propensity of material authorized for publication by the Rebbe implies that it would be intellectually dishonest to say that "the Rebbe "never said he was"."
chinagel requested clarification from ExGingi whether he is "of the opinion that the Rebbe held he was moshiach? Do you still think he must be moshiach?" To which ExGingi's terse response was "yes and yes".
In an interesting twist, Yard sale himself then brought a Hebrew quote that offers the same explanation that ExGingi offered earlier to the עצמות ומהות מלובש בגוף statement.
Dan decided to interject with a link to Wikipedia (which was then quoted by Yard sale) alleging that the Rebbe clearly told a journalist that he is not Moshiach, and that said interchange is recorded. [said "proof" is quoted by Wikipedia referencing an exchange between Tomer Persiko and Rabbi Chaim Rapoport, Persiko (who isn't quoted in current thread) offers a response to Rabbi Rapoport, but rather than going that route ExGingi, being honest and open minded searched for same recording to no avail, and challenged all to come up with it. chbochur reports that he inquired with various contacts at JEMedia (which Rabbi Rapoport alleges holds such recording) and none seem to be aware of such, he then reached out to Rabbi Rapoport himself who said he needs to dig it up, we patiently await it.]
With a few more questions thrown about, to which others might have offered some responses, at a certain point ExGingi said that he is "waiting for responses to my questions/inquiries before I publicly respond to others."
After some noisy nonsense introduced by none other than our dear friend CBC (what a surprise) who was given undue credibility by aygart, Yehuda57 offered a response to the ostensibly Kefira statement brought in the interview "if the Rebbe, G-d forbid … then we can stop putting on t’fillin, chalila". Yehuda57's response has several parts, first and foremost he asks whether "those people stop putting on tefillin?" And then went on to say that "perhaps there is just a slight chance they were saying extreme things as "shock jocks" in order to make a seperate point which may or may not have been excusable in context but appears blasphemous typed out coldly 30 years later?" after some additional noise from CBC and followup by aygart, Yehuda57 added that "if you are working on a premise that it is possible a Lubavitcher could believe that any reason at all is enough to make him stop putting on tefillin, then we have nothing to discuss."
When aygart responded to that with pleasure in finding out that said premise is flawed, he asked "how is one supposed to take such a statement?" ExGingi replied with an allegation that accepting such a baffling statement כפשוטו when referring to people whom you know to be שומרי תומ"צ, indicates a lack of Yiras Shomayim. While Yehuda57 went into a little more detail and another example, stating that if on'es "baseline, like others here, is that Chabad = kefira, no amount of contextualizing will change that, to the point that you could absurdly say Chabad hides their true beliefs."
After some more noise, the בעל אכסניא offered his regular english explanation of the עצמות ומהות מלובש בגוף statement, while separately making disparaging comments about the magazine where it was quoted. A third time must have been the charm, along with a disparaging comment about the source by Dan, and seemingly נחה דעתו of R' Yard sale.
After some additional back and forth noise regarding various "factions" within Lubavitch, Yard sale gave the thread an interesting turn, acknowledging that "It’s easy to smugly look down on others but the Litvaks have their own problems; last I checked צפיה לישועהis also one of the י״ג עיקרים yet few of them take moshiach seriously. Sure we give lip service to the idea multiple times a day, but who is really interested in giving up all the good stuff we have here? It’s like some foreign concept that most of us espouse מן השפה ולחוץ." Dan made some serious allegations about how he heard friends in non-Chabad school talking and from there discussion went OT about school vs home education, including proper attitude towards emphasis of שכר ועונש and attitude towards non-Jews.
« Last edited by ExGingi on July 14, 2019, 05:56:55 PM »
