(False) Accusations Of Kehot Forgery

[imayid2]

claims regarding this are made about the early rounds of haskala (reshima posted by @ExGingi )

The claims are disputed, evidence is necessary.

[ExGingi]

Uch

Didn't I say it's time to lock this thread?

[zh cohen]

Uch

You are right. I should have said, "Perhaps if they had embraced Chassidus they would have reduced the amount of assimilation."

[gozalim]

You are right. I should have said, "Perhaps if they had embraced Chassidus they would have reduced the amount of assimilation."

I'd believe that true, mainly for the strength chassidus gives

[EliJelly]

Just to clear this up:
This was printed in הגאון:

This is Rav Chaim himself way after the controversy, highly praising Eliach, and corroborating what he says about his involvement.

I posted that more for the sentiment in Rav Vozner's letter and the Eidah, not so much about the authenticity in question of Reb Chaim's Haskamah. Was Reb Chaim well versed in all the details of that history? I'm sure not, he didn't have the time for that. I don't see his Haskamah as a validation for all the misnagdim's version of stories brought there, rather support for publishing the biography of the Gra and his holy fight against those he viewed not in line with traditional Yiddishkeit. (I don't think that the Steipler or other Litvish Gedolim would see the need the publish that book - in its entirety - in 21st century. וד׳׳ל)

[imayid2]

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.)

[gozalim]

The claims are disputed, evidence is necessary.

The גר"א's positive attitude about שאר חכמות is disputed?

[imayid2]

The גר"א's positive attitude about שאר חכמות is disputed?

Positive attitude is very vague. The Gemara says כי היא חכמתכם ובינתכם לעיני הגויים…
Exactly what he held about it is unclear and always being disputed. Although “the early rounds of haskala” have zero to do with that.

[imayid2]

I posted that more for the sentiment in Rav Vozner's letter and the Eidah, not so much about the authenticity in question of Reb Chaim's Haskamah. Was Reb Chaim well versed in all the details of that history? I'm sure not, he didn't have the time for that. I don't see his Haskamah as a validation for all the misnagdim's version of stories brought there, rather support for publishing the biography of the Gra and his holy fight against those he viewed not in line with traditional Yiddishkeit. (I don't think that the Steipler or other Litvish Gedolim would see the need the publish that book - in its entirety - in 21st century. וד׳׳ל)

Ah. I was posting Rav Chaim to show that he didn’t agree with the others sentiments about delving into this part of history.

[ExGingi]

The claims are disputed, evidence is necessary.

לא ראינו אינה ראיה.

You would need very strong evidence (which I don't think you can come up with) in order to dispute historical facts written or told by any Lubavitcher Rebbe.

[imayid2]

לא ראינו אינה ראיה.

You would need very strong evidence (which I don't think you can come up with) in order to dispute historical facts written or told by any Lubavitcher Rebbe.

There is plenty written on this. The most specific to our subject at hand would be Yisrael Bartels article on the role of haskala in shaping the התנגדות. Can’t imagine this is a conversation that’s worth having so let’s leave it at that.

[CountValentine]

Didn't I say it's time to lock this thread?

[gozalim]

There is plenty written on this. The most specific to our subject at hand would be Yisrael Bartels article on the role of haskala in shaping the התנגדות. Can’t imagine this is a conversation that’s worth having so let’s leave it at that.

Just asking yes or no, no need for discussion:
Did you read the Reshima he linked to?
(not asking wether you accept the facts in it)

[imayid2]

Just asking yes or no, no need for discussion:
Did you read the Reshima he linked to?
(not asking wether you accept the facts in it)

I looked through it a bit

[ExGingi]

You would need very strong evidence (which I don't think you can come up with) in order to dispute historical facts written or told by any Lubavitcher Rebbe.

There is plenty written on this. The most specific to our subject at hand would be Yisrael Bartels article on the role of haskala in shaping the התנגדות. Can’t imagine this is a conversation that’s worth having so let’s leave it at that.

A: The previous Lubavitcher Rebbe writes various historical stories containing facts about things that transpired during the time of the Alter Rebbe, including various instigations by משכילים.
B: The claims are disputed, evidence is necessary.
A: You would need very strong evidence to dispute historical facts written by a Lubavitcher Rebbe (who is known for his principled adherence to truth).
B: There is plenty written on this. The most specific to our subject at hand would be Yisrael Bartels article..

C: Yisrael who??? (I have no clue who he is or if what he wrote negates anything written by the Lubavitcher Rebbe, but did he also happen to write extensively to dispute Einstein's General Theory of Relativity?)

D: Did you read what the Lubavitcher Rebbe wrote?
B: I looked through it a bit

[imayid2]

There is plenty written on this. The most specific to our subject at hand would be Yisrael Bartels article on the role of haskala in shaping the התנגדות. Can’t imagine this is a conversation that’s worth having so let’s leave it at that.


A: The previous Lubavitcher Rebbe writes various historical stories containing facts about things that transpired during the time of the Alter Rebbe, including various instigations by משכילים.
B: The claims are disputed, evidence is necessary.
A: You would need very strong evidence to dispute historical facts written by a Lubavitcher Rebbe (who is known for his principled adherence to truth).
B: There is plenty written on this. The most specific to our subject at hand would be Yisrael Bartels article..

C: Yisrael who??? (I have no clue who he is or if what he wrote negates anything written by the Lubavitcher Rebbe, but did he also happen to write extensively to dispute Einstein's General Theory of Relativity?)

D: Did you read what the Lubavitcher Rebbe wrote?
B: I looked through it a bit

Can’t imagine this is a conversation that’s worth having so let’s leave it at that.

[gozalim]

in general, reading regurgitated academic theories about the relevant documents without bothering to read the original documents they refer to (even if you then choose to reject them), isn't a good look...
and the confidence stacked on top of that looks even sillier

[imayid2]

in general, reading regurgitated academic theories about the relevant documents without bothering to read the original documents they refer to (even if you then choose to reject them), isn't a good look...
and the confidence stacked on top of that looks even sillier

I have no interest in discussing this further. I’m not sure why I’m being continuously provoked to do so, or how you’d know what I’ve read or what I haven’t.

[gozalim]

or how you’d know what I’ve read or what I haven’t.

I asked. by all means amend your reply.
In general this seems to be your MO in this whole conversation. constantly quoting documents of this nature

I have no interest in discussing this further

no arguments here

[imayid2]

In general this seems to be your MO in this whole conversation. constantly quoting documents of this nature

Its undeniable that there are valid points brought up, and to just swipe at the author without any substantive answer to them isn’t very convincing.

I asked. by all means amend your reply.

In case you can’t tell I really don’t want to discuss this.