Chabad Minhagim: Pros & Cons

[jj1000]

LOL, I spend who knows how many words trying to tell you how I'm not a baal madreiga and this is the response. We're talking different languages.

Makes me sad this wasn't shared at a farbraingen in a sukkah with everyone here in attendance. It's something that can't be recreated and I think it would be understood so much better in that environment.

[jj1000]

Honestly, it's not that difficult to understand that the same people who will go to the ends of the earth, literally, to get one single Jew to make one single brachah, one single time, and not give it a second thought, wouldn't be more bothered by rain than by missing a brachah.

I think almost everyone who is a bal teshuva can relate so well to this.

A close family member decided to stop walking to shul on shabbos. His sister berated him bitterly, who are you fooling! We are eating cheeseburgers at McDonald's together, but you won't drive to shul on Shabbos?!

Crazy right?

But funny thing is, he ignored her. He didn't stop eating his cheeseburger and he continued to walk to shul.

And now has a beautiful frum family.

I'll let @ExGingi explain the highest level we can hope to reach is that of a bal teshuva.

[imayid2]

It would be completely inaccurate to write off these targeted points as just somebody who has no understanding of חסידים.
The wondrous attributes חסידישקייט embodies is well known. It is indisputable that the purity of heart and מדריגות of עבודת השם it helped so many people achieve with its joy and warmth saved a tremendous amount of souls, and is acknowledged in retrospect to be a very necessary boost to Judaism at large, although the litvaks will say its the opposition that kept it in check helped shape it properly.
My own gg grandfather chose to give up his life rather than hide under false conversion papers during WW2 along with many others as is well documented in Slovakia. I have no doubt that the fact the he was a full fledged chortkever chasid helped him make that choice into something which was not even a question for him. (Note that decision bepashtus is halachikly required.)

Rabbi Yisroel Reisman has a beautiful shiur about the mistake litvaks make in failing to realise the beauty of e.g saying Tehilim before shachris and it doesn't have to mean you miss zman tfila to do so.
Let the record reflect that I choose to send my children to a cheder with heimisha rabbeim in recognition of the varmkeit and frishkiet they emanate which is sorely needed

These attributes are very very sustainable without the overriding of some  laws in ways that are very hard to defend. Proof in the pudding is that many חסידים are very scrupulous and meticulous and do not ascribe to the more questionable activities. Ironically, the Munkacher was mentioned.  Has anyone noticed his harsh rhetoric one he concludes a practise is indefensible? Check out נימוקי אורח חיים what he has to say about not sleeping in the sukka...

[Pony]

My understanding after reading through this thread and the ask the Lubavitcher thread is that all this discussion boils down to a basic difference between chasidim and non chasidim. Chasidim will follow what a rebbe says blindly and without questioning, even if it seems to be a little different from what is said in halacha. They will also convince themselves to feel simcha and kedusha in what the rebbe told them they should feel simcha and kedusha. Whereas by non chasidim, no leader is above making a mistake. If he says something that doesn’t seem to shtim with halacha, it’s a kashya on him, not a reason to blindly follow.

[Yehuda57]

My understanding after reading through this thread and the ask the Lubavitcher thread is that all this discussion boils down to a basic difference between chasidim and non chasidim. Chasidim will follow what a rebbe says blindly and without questioning, even if it seems to be a little different from what is said in halacha. They will also convince themselves to feel simcha and kedusha in what the rebbe told them they should feel simcha and kedusha. Whereas by non chasidim, no leader is above making a mistake. If he says something that doesn’t seem to shtim with halacha, it’s a kashya on him, not a reason to blindly follow.

1000% false in ways too numerous for me to have the time to address today

[gozalim]

The Rebbe said, in multiple contexts, that it is possible for someone to be "farbrent" on one Mitzvah, to the point of being a tzaddik gomur on that one Mitzvah, regardless of where he's holding on other areas

[aygart]

Wow has this gone off the rails. Shocked.

It seems it is a bit of circular reasoning. Why is there so much tzaar? Because it is the minhag. Why is it able to be the minhag? Because there is so much tzaar.


What would be with someone who while eating in the sukka in the rain  and would never think of doing otherwise thinks to himself how eating in the pouring rain is one of the cons of being a lubavitcher?

[Dan]

What would be with someone who while eating in the sukka in the rain  and would never think of doing otherwise thinks to himself how eating in the pouring rain is one of the cons of being a lubavitcher?

Show me that chosid please.
It's one of the greatest pros! Gd is saying that he wants to be alone with the Lubavitcher chasidim that will go to the Nth degree and the end of the world when called upon!

Besides, the greatest sukkah memories are the ones made in the rain.

[aygart]

Show me that chosid please.
It's one of the greatest pros!

Besides, the greatest sukkah memories are the ones made in the rain.

That is your opinion.

[aygart]

Gd is saying that he wants to be alone with the Lubavitcher chasidim that will go to the Nth degree and the end of the world when called upon!

Machlokes between you and the yerushalmi.

[imayid2]

Show me that chosid please.
It's one of the greatest pros! Gd is saying that he wants to be alone with the Lubavitcher chasidim that will go to the Nth degree and the end of the world when called upon!

Besides, the greatest sukkah memories are the ones made in the rain.

The title of this thread should be duly changed to pros and pros

[Yehuda57]

Wow has this gone off the rails. Shocked.

It seems it is a bit of circular reasoning. Why is there so much tzaar? Because it is the minhag. Why is it able to be the minhag? Because there is so much tzaar.


What would be with someone who while eating in the sukka in the rain  and would never think of doing otherwise thinks to himself how eating in the pouring rain is one of the cons of being a lubavitcher?

What if, and I can't believe I'm going to say this publicly, a thread title like Chabad Minhagim Pros and Cons was understood by virtually everyone reading it to be a humorous title?

And goodness, I dont exactly love fasting on Yom Kippur, I'm not thrilled about kaporos, and don't get me started on eating 8 kzeisim of matzah with 86.4 seconds. Yet I'd do anything to be able to keep those mitzvos and minhagim, and as is evident from my thousands of posts here I ain't no tzadik.

Tzaar from things like rain or smelly chickens are #firstworldproblems that we post in this thread. Tzaar from missing a bracha are #soullevelexistentialproblems. They're not in the same stratosphere, and lumping them together does not compute.

[imayid2]

What if, and I can't believe I'm going to say this publicly, a thread title like Chabad Minhagim Pros and Cons was understood by virtually everyone reading it to be a humorous title?

And goodness, I dont exactly love fasting on Yom Kippur, I'm not thrilled about kaporos, and don't get me started on eating 8 kzeisim of matzah with 86.4 seconds. Yet I'd do anything to be able to keep those mitzvos and minhagim, and as is evident from my thousands of posts here I ain't no tzadik.

Tzaar from things like rain or smelly chickens are #firstworldproblems that we post in this thread. Tzaar from missing a bracha are #soullevelexistentialproblems. They're not in the same stratosphere, and lumping them together does not compute.

I'm not sure if you're realizing this, but for example one of the two citations to justify making the bracha is solely applicable if there is a claim that no physical pain is being felt, which you certainly agree (I think) can only be said for a very select few.

[Yehuda57]

Rain in your soup causes you "physical pain"?

ETA: to paraphrase my grandmother, are ya'll made of sugar?

[imayid2]

Rain in your soup causes you "physical pain"?

It causes the physical world phenomenon חז״ל refer to as מצטער.

[ExGingi]

LOL, I spend who knows how many words trying to tell you how I'm not a baal madreiga and this is the response. We're talking different languages.

-10000000

This isn't laughable, it's actually very sad. While @imayid2 seems to keep the discussion on a much more civilized level than others that suffer from the same problem, the issue is IMHO runs too deep, expressing itself with lack of humility (to put it mildly).

It reminds of one Rav Kahana who supposedly asked the Rebbe in the name of "Bnei Torah" why Lubavitch doesn't sleep in the Sukkah. Those "asking" (unfortunately, seemingly including @imayid2) don't want an honest answer, nor do they want to learn.

We try to explain with all kinds of examples that doing something that counters one own core identity would be tremendous tzaar, and only when I was able to concoct an extreme and ridiculous example, did he concede that.... but what about the brocho?

Well, that was addressed much earlier in the conversation by none other than @aygart who posted a link to שו"ת מהרש"ג (image of relevant section below), but the "question" was about the level of tzaar. We address that and we're back at the question of the brocho.



TBH, I wasn't aware of the שו"ת מהרש"ג up until last night. But I definitely know that canceling my identity would be way worse than eating in the Sukkah in the rain.

As a matter of fact, I alluded to doing things in the rain in another thread just a couple of days ago. It can be seen in two (general) levels. One is actually happiness about being able to stick to what defines my identity despite hardships - נתת ליראיך נס להתנוסס, overcoming the hardship puts me on a higher level (in a way similar to R Akiva saying מתי יבוא לידי ואקיימנה).

Another level I referred to as אנא נסיב מלכא - I don't care what else goes on. הן ולאו בהשוואה. All I care about is being connected and doing what I was told to do (which creates the connection), I am TOTALLY AMBIVALENT to what else goes on.

I believe that amongst chassidim both levels exist with plenty of sub levels.

Gut YT!

[chbochur]

From שיעורי הלכה למעשה from r' Berel Levin

ז) ברכה על הסעודה בגשם
כעין זה מוצאים אנו שאנו נוהגים לברך לישב בסעודה גם כשיורד גשם, אף שמבואר בשוע"ר (סי' תרלט סי"ז): "שהוא מצטער מחמת הגשם וכל המצטער פטור מן הסוכה". (ושם סכ"ג): "כל הפטור מישיבת הסוכה ואינו יוצא מהסוכה אינו מקבל שכר על אותו ישיבה ואינו אלא מן ההדיוטות".

ובאמת יש מחלוקת הפוסקים, במי שמחמיר על עצמו לאכול בסוכה גם בעת הגשם, אם הוא יכול לברך לישב בסוכה, כמובא בברכי יוסף להחיד"א (סי' תרלט ס"ח): "וראיתי להרב החסיד מר זקני מהר"א אזולאי זלה"ה בהגהותיו כ"י שכתב יש שנסתפק אם רצו להחמיר על עצמן אותם שהם פטורים מסוכה לאכול ולישן מה אם מברכין עליה, וכתב בספר בית מועד דהואיל וקבעה עליו חובה גילה דעתו שאינו מצטער ומברך עכ"ד, ונראה לי שאין לסמוך על סברא זו ... ואם בירך הוי ברכה לבטלה".

אמנם אנו נוהגים כדעת הבית מועד, לאכול בסוכה ולברך עליה גם בעת הגשם, וכמובא ברשימות היומן (ע' רסב): "סוכות [תרצ"ג] בליל ב' וכן [ב]יום ב', הי' גשם שוטף, גם יותר משיעור דשו"ע, ואמר "לישב בסוכה" צריך לברך, וכן עשה".

ואולי הי' מקום לומר שזהו גם הטעם שאנו נוהגים לברך לישב בסוכה גם על ההבדלה, אף שלפי הנראה בשוע"ר פטור הוא מלברך עליה. אמנם באמת יש הפרש גדול בינם, ובהקדם:

מבואר בשוע"ר (סי' תרמ ס"א-ב): "נשים ועבדים פטורים מן הסוכה מפני שהוא מצות עשה שהזמן גרמא ... אם ירצו לישב בסוכה ולברך הרשות בידם". והיינו דוקא כשאכלו כשיעור, משא"כ כשאכלו פחות משיעור אכילת קבע, אין יכולות לברך; ולכאורה מהו החילוק בינם, הרי בין כה פטורות הן מסוכה, והרשות בידן לברך, ומה משנה אם אכלו כשיעור או פחות מכשיעור?

אמנם חילוק זה נתבאר בשוע"ר (סי' יז ס"ג): "ומכל מקום אפילו נקבות וודאים וכן עבדים אם ירצו להתעטף בציצית ולברך הרשות בידן, כמו שנוהגין בשאר מצות עשה שהזמן גרמא, ויכולין לומר וצונו להתעטף בציצית אע"פ שהן אינן מצווין, מפני שהאנשים מצווים על כך, וגם הן כשמקיימין מצות שהם פטורים מהם, אעפ"י שאין להם שכר גדול כמצווה ועושה מכל מקום קצת שכר יש להם, לכן יכולות הן לברך על כל מצות שהן פטורין מהם אם עושין המצות כתיקונן בענין שהאנשים יכולים לברך עליהם". הרי שדוקא "אם עושין המצות כתיקונן" יכולות לברך על הציצית. וכן הדין בתקיעת שופר (שוע"ר סי' תקפט ס"ב) ובשאר המצות שהזמן גרמא, שאף שהנשים פטורות מהן יכולות הן לברך, אבל דוקא "אם עושין המצות כתיקונן".

וטעם הדבר הוא, כי אם היא מקיימת את המצוה כתיקונה, אזי היא "אינה מצווה ועושה", ולכן יכולה היא לברך. משא"כ אם אינה מקיימת את המצוה כתיקונה, אזי היא "אינה מצווה ואינה עושה", ולכן אינה יכולה לברך.

וכן הוא הדין גם באנשים, כמבואר בשוע"ר (סי' יד ס"ה): "אם רוצה להטיל בה ציצית תוך שלשים יום ולברך עליו הרשות בידו ואינה ברכה לבטלה, ואע"פ שהוא פטור מן הדבר יכול לומר וצונו להתעטף, כמו שהנשים מברכין על כל המצות שהן פטורות מהם". והיינו דוקא כשמקיים את המצוה כתיקונה, אלא שאינו מחוייב בדבר, כמו בטלית שאולה, או בסוכה שיורד בה גשם. משא"כ כשאינו מקיים את המצוה כתיקונה אזי אינו יכול לברך.

ולכאורה גם בהבדלה על היין, אם נאמר שאין לה דין "אכילת קבע", הרי לא קיים המצוה כתיקונה ואינו יכול לברך.

וזה שנהגו לברך על ההבדלה מוכיח לנו דקיי"ל, שדין הבדלה שונה הוא מקידוש, כי עצם ההבדלה מחייבת מדינא להבדיל בסוכה, וכמובא לעיל משוע"ר (סי' תרלט ס"ו): "המבדיל על הכוס צריך לכנוס לסוכה להבדיל שם, שהרי בשאר ימות השנה נכנס לביתו להבדיל שם". וכיון ש"צריך לכנוס לסוכה להבדיל שם", הרי זה מחייב גם בברכת לישב בסוכה.

אלא שמכל מקום נראה שאין לך בו אלא חידושו, לברך לישב בסוכה בהבדלה על היין, משא"כ בהבדלה על חמר מדינה, או לאידך ברכת המילה על היין, באלו לא שמענו הוראה לברך לישב בסוכה.

[EliJelly]

We're talking different languages.

This whole discussion in summery.

[imayid2]

-10000000

This isn't laughable, it's actually very sad. While @imayid2 seems to keep the discussion on a much more civilized level than others that suffer from the same problem, the issue is IMHO runs too deep, expressing itself with lack of humility (to put it mildly).

It reminds of one Rav Kahana who supposedly asked the Rebbe in the name of "Bnei Torah" why Lubavitch doesn't sleep in the Sukkah. Those "asking" (unfortunately, seemingly including @imayid2) don't want an honest answer, nor do they want to learn.

We try to explain with all kinds of examples that doing something that counters one own core identity would be tremendous tzaar, and only when I was able to concoct an extreme and ridiculous example, did he concede that.... but what about the brocho?

Thank you for acknowledging my efforts. Just as it is evident that I have difficulty relating to some things in other circles, it should be kept in mind that in my circles sharp Halachik rhetoric is the norm, and no one is immune. However I agree it could get out of hand.

If you don't mind me pointing out, the bracha issue was the core of my question from the get go.

Well, that was addressed much earlier in the conversation by none other than @aygart who posted a link to שו"ת מהרש"ג (image of relevant section below), but the "question" was about the level of tzaar. We address that and we're back at the question of the brocho.



TBH, I wasn't aware of the שו"ת מהרש"ג up until last night. But I definitely know that canceling my identity would be way worse than eating in the Sukkah in the rain.

As a matter of fact, I alluded to doing things in the rain in another thread just a couple of days ago. It can be seen in two (general) levels. One is actually happiness about being able to stick to what defines my identity despite hardships - נתת ליראיך נס להתנוסס, overcoming the hardship puts me on a higher level (in a way similar to R Akiva saying מתי יבוא לידי ואקיימנה).

Another level I referred to as אנא נסיב מלכא - I don't care what else goes on. הן ולאו בהשוואה. All I care about is being connected and doing what I was told to do (which creates the connection), I am TOTALLY AMBIVALENT to what else goes on.

Do you realize that to even start analyzing your answer from my halachik viewpoints (and although @CV can't wrap his head around the fact that there all people like that I sincerely hope you can understand) I have to accept the claim that merely not making a blessing on something which halachikly can't be made makes you "lose your identity". It's like totally impossible for me to understand that, and nothing, absolutely nothing, that was said until this point in the conversation explains that?

Another point. The מהרש״ג reiterates multiple times that this is only for a select few and it has to be real. From a halachik perspective I see this as a rubber band. First everyone bent backwards to halachikly justify sitting in the sukka. Then there were a select few who made a bracha, muchs more shver but some tentative explanations are given.
But here is the thing. When its applied in the way it seems to be applied in an all encompassing anyone who's associated with Chabad way, it becomes stretched too far. At that point (from I think everyone on the outsides perspective) it simply snaps.

[EliJelly]

My understanding after reading through this thread and the ask the Lubavitcher thread is that all this discussion boils down to a basic difference between chasidim and non chasidim. Chasidim will follow what a rebbe says blindly and without questioning, even if it seems to be a little different from what is said in halacha. They will also convince themselves to feel simcha and kedusha in what the rebbe told them they should feel simcha and kedusha. Whereas by non chasidim, no leader is above making a mistake. If he says something that doesn’t seem to shtim with halacha, it’s a kashya on him, not a reason to blindly follow.

You don't need to attribute the Rebbe's actions necessarily as a "mistake" for a reason not to imitate it.

See what the holy בני יששכר writes here;
https://beta.hebrewbooks.org/reader/reader.aspx?sfid=4702#p=118&fitMode=fitwidth&hlts=&ocr=