Why do they 'reject' OUR Rebbe?

[Torah613]

I will not comment on the rest of your post, but I must react to the unfortunate example of eating strawberries - wher often if you know how to look you can actually see the buggies crawling in and out of berries/romaine etc, where those who don't know how to look claim they never found anything and it is mere chumra...

[ktonton]

Originally Posted by Torah613

I will not comment on the rest of your post, but I must react to the unfortunate example of eating strawberries - wher often if you know how to look you can actually see the buggies crawling in and out of berries/romaine etc, where those who don't know how to look claim they never found anything and it is mere chumra...

I've never seen a classical posek assur strawberries on account of bugs, and if it was a problem, they'd have said something.

And nishtaneh hateva isn't a valid answer. Those bugs have awlays been there, aruch hashulchan mentions them and says that everyone is accustomed to be leinient about it.

To quote my brother (who's studied this issue) ALL fruits and vegetables have bugs, have always had bugs, and will always have bugs, and if you look closely enough, you'll find them.

Figs are a particular example, you can never have a fig that doesn't have at least a couple whole wasps in it. It doesn't exist, period. It wouldn't be a fig if it didn't.

So there are either two choices: Either state that all of our fathers were oiver on a deoraisa, hundreds upon hundreds of thousands of times all througout their entire lives (which is offensive in the extreme) or that there is some kind of loop hole that makes it ok, and likely being machmir is assur.

[Torah613]

Enjoy your thrips (after learning הלכות תולעים, of course).

[Meshulam]

As is often the case, some of the above comments are examples of people making the Rebbe after one's own image. People similarly do this with halachah, G-d, etc.

[Meshulam]

Frankly, I'm getting a little tired of ktonton's derision of the Rebbe's Chassidim. I understand that ktonton has some deeply held views about Chabad institutions, and Chabad practices, and I do not want to attack him personally for those views. But ktonton frequently makes fun of what he calls the "chumra of the month club." However, ktonton almost never identifies this club's members, or this club's mission statement.

More to the point: Ktonton, Which chumros and which practices do you find suspect? Please be specific. So far, you have escaped the criticism you so deserve by being so vague that no matter what the response is to your derision, you can claim to have been misunderstood or misquoted. So be specific, and then you won't have to worry about being misquoted later.

[Torah613]

Originally Posted by ktonton

I've never seen a classical posek assur strawberries on account of bugs, and if it was a problem, they'd have said something.

What are strawberries called in the language of "classical poskim"?
I don't know either. Is it perhaps one of the things the Aruch Hashulchan mentions? I also don't know which "classical poskim" should mention it, as it was not around before the mid 1700's (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Garden_strawberry).
In any case, here is how concerned the Aruch Hashulchan was about bugs (in a siman - siman 84 - of close to 100 sei'ifim!). I cannot identify all the things he mentions, but it may just be, that one of them is the elusive strawberry (did they even know of strawberries in the Lita?). But he does mention many other common fruit:

סעיף ס
כל מיני פירות שדרכן להתליע כשהם מחוברים לא יאכל עד שיבדוק הפרי בפנימיותה שמא יש בו תולעת ולכן אין לאכלה בלילה בלא ראיית עין לאור הנר וכן הדין במם ושארי משקים שדרך ליפול לשם זבובים ותולעים ויתושים אסור לשתותן בלא בדיקה ולפ"ז במיני קטניות במדינתנו שברוב השנים מצוי בהם הכנימה וכן בפירי מאלינע"ס או ווינקסלע"ן שתמיד מצוי בהם תולעים אסורים לאכול בלא בדיקה וכן בתפוחים ובערנע"ס בקיץ שמצוי בהם תולעים אסור לאכלן בלא בדיקה ובשנה שהתולע מצוי בהם בהגרעינים אסור לאכול הגרעינים שלהם ויחתוך האוכל וישליך הגרעינים לחוץ ודבר זה תלוי בכל מדינה ומדינה כפי דרך פירות שלה כי אין דומה מדינה למדינה ואין דומה שנה לשנה כידוע:

סעיף סא
וזה לשון הרב בעל חכמת אדם [כלל ל"ח] ואין כל המדינות שוות בזה כי הקירסי"ן במדינות אשכנז זאקסין צרפת כל המינין מוחזקין בתולעים בעודן במחובר זולתי מין אחד שקורין זויע"ר קירסי"ן וכן כל מיני פלוימע"ן וכל מיני פירות וצריך לבדקן מבפנים ובדאנציג וק"ב ומדינותיהן הפלוימען שכיח בהם מתולעים אבל הקירסי"ן אינו שכיח אלא המתולעין ניכרין מבחוץ שיש בו כמו גומא ובמדינת ליטא הפלוימע"ן הגדילים שם מחמת שהפירות כחושים מאד לא שכיח בהם תולעים כמו כן בקירסי"ן אבל הפלוימע"ן היבשים שמביאין ממדינות אחרות צריך לבדוק מבפנים כי הם מוחזקים בודאי כתולעים עכ"ל וכן המנהג פשוט בכל ישראל שהפלוימען היבשים שבאים ממרחק פותחין כל פלוי"ם ואותן שיש בהן כמין גרגרים שאינם חלקים ויפים משליכין אותן שמפני שהם מוחזקים בתולעים יש לשער שהם הם התולעים שנתרסקו או שזהו ריקום התולעת:

סעיף סב
עוד כתב הירקות בכל המדינות מוחזקים בתולעים וכן ירק שקורין פעטרוסק"א וקימ"ל ועשב שקורין הויפ"ט או קא"פ קרוי"ט ושאר כל מיני ירקות מוחזקין בתולעים ואסור לאכלן בלי בדיקה וכן מיני סאלאטי"ן וכן בצלים ירוקים שאוכלין אותן חיין וצריך לבדוק היטב וכן קיטניות ירוקות שעודן בשרביטין שקורין ארבע"ס ובאבי"ן מוחזקין מאד בתולעים ואסור לאכלן עד שיפתח כל שרביט ושרביט ויבדוק הקיטניות כל אחד בפני עצמו ומה שאומרות הנשים שמהבהבין הירקות באש אינו מועיל ומין ירק שקורין קראפ"א שמניחין אותו באוגערקע"ס אין לך קלח וקלח שאין בו הרבה תולעים ולכן אפילו בדיעבד אם הניחו אותו באוגערקע"ס צריך לסנן הרוטב ולהדיח האוגערקע"ס אך כשרוצין להניח משום ריח אזי יחתכו כל העלין ויניחו השרביטים כי גם להם יש ריח עכ"ל ואנחנו בדקנו גם בהשרביטים ויש בהם תולעים ולכן נהגו בביתי להניח בתנור חם מאד כמו בעת אפיית לחם את השרביטין בלבד ואח"כ להניחם בהאוגערקע"ס ודע שהאוגערקע"ס עצמן הם כשרים גמורים ואין בהם תולעים אבל ירק קרוי"ט שמעמידין אותו בכבישה לכל החורף בהם הרבה תולעים ברוב השנים ובודקין כל עלה ועלה בפ"ע פעמים ושלש ואח"כ חותכין אותן ומעמידין אותן לימות החורף ואת זה נסינו וראינו שאותם העלים הבדוקים אם לא יחתכו אותם באותו יום להעמידם בכבישה במלח בכלי כנהוג ואם יניחו את העלין עד למחר יתהוו בהם עוד תולעים ורוחשים ופורשים מעלה לעלה וגם על המקום שמונחים שם והחיוב לברור מחדש וכן נהגתי בביתי:

סעיף סג
עוד כתב העדשים שמעתי שיש בהם שני מינים יש מין שמוחזק בתולעים שנתערב בתוכן כמין תולעים אדומים ויש מין שלא נמצא ביניהם כלום עכ"ל ואני שמעתי שהעדשים הקטנים מוחזקים בתולעים והגדולים אינם מוחזקים בתולעים ובביתי מתרחקים מאכילת עדשים וכמהין ופטריות שקורין שוועמלא"ך מוחזקים מאד בתולעים וצריכין בדיקה היטב ויש שאין מבררין אותן מתולעים ורק מבשלין אותן צרורות במטפחת כדי ליתן טעם בהתבשיל ואחר הבישול זורקין אותן והגרעינים שבתפוחים ובערנע"ס מוחזקים בתולעים לכן לא יאכלו הגרעינים וקליפת פאמאראנצין יש לבדוק אם אין בהם מילבי"ן מפני שזה שכיח מאד וגדול אחד הנהיג בעירו להניחם בתנור חם עד שישרפו שם המילבין ואורז ודוחן שכיחי בהם מילבין ובפרט באורז בקיץ שבא ממרחקים ושמעתי שיש שני מיני אורז פשוטים וטובים ובאחד מהם אינו שכיח ובהשני שכיח ולא נתברר לי דבר זה היטב על כן אין ביכלתי לפרוט בבירור ובדרך כלל ראוי להתרחק מאכילת אורז שקורין ריי"ז בקיץ וכן אני נוהג ובקיץ כל מיני גרויפי"ן יש בהם מילבי"ן וראיתי בעיני גם הגרויפין שלקחום מתחת הריחים נמצאו בהם הרבה מילבין וראוי לכל בעל נפש לבלי לאכול גרויפי"ן בקיץ אם לא שיניחם בתנור חם וכן נהגו בביתי להתרחק בכל היכולת מגרויפי"ן בעת החום ואם יש הכרח מניחים אותם בתנור חם מאד וכולי האי ואולי [וע' מה שכתבנו בסי' ק' סעיף י"ז]:

And nishtaneh hateva isn't a valid answer. Those bugs have awlays been there, aruch hashulchan mentions them and says that everyone is accustomed to be leinient about it.

An exact cite would be helpful. He doesn't look to lenient to me. And yes, in some ways the metzius has changed due to a variety of factors.

To quote my brother (who's studied this issue) ALL fruits and vegetables have bugs, have always had bugs, and will always have bugs, and if you look closely enough, you'll find them.

Again - the AH:

סעיף לו
יש מי שכתב בשם חכמי הטבע דהמסתכל בזכוכית המגדלת שקורין ספאקטיוו"א יראה בחומץ מלא תולעים והנה בחומץ אין חשש כמו שנתבאר דהתולעים המתהוים בתלוש התירה התורה אמנם שמעתי שבכל מיני מים וביחוד במי גשמים מלא ברואים דקים שאין העין יכולה לראותם ובילדותי שמעתי מפי אחד שהיה במרחקים ורה דרך זכוכית המגדלת עד מאד כרבבות פעמים במים כל המיני ברואים ולפ"ז איך אנו שותים מים שהרי אלו הברואים נתהוו במקורם אמנם האמת הוא דלא אסרה תורה במה שאין העין שולטת בו דלא ניתנה תורה למלאכים דאל"כ הרי כמה מהחוקרים כתבו שגם כל האויר הוא מלא ברואים דקים מן הדקים וכשהאדם פותח פיו בולע כמה מהם אלא ודאי דהבל יפצה פיהם ואף אם כן הוא כיון שאין העין שולט בהם לאו כלום הוא אמנם כמה שהעין יכול לראות אפילו נגד השמש ואפילו דק מן הדק הוה שרץ גמור:

Figs are a particular example, you can never have a fig that doesn't have at least a couple whole wasps in it. It doesn't exist, period. It wouldn't be a fig if it didn't.

AFAIK (I may be mistaken), they disintegrate and no longer visible.

So there are either two choices: Either state that all of our fathers were oiver on a deoraisa, hundreds upon hundreds of thousands of times all througout their entire lives (which is offensive in the extreme) or that there is some kind of loop hole that makes it ok, and likely being machmir is assur.

And that loop hole is...? Exact cites from poskim, not from brothers, please.

[ilovejudaism]

Originally Posted by Zeigezunt

I've noticed many times, while reading things on frumteens, and having conversations with non-Lubavitchers, that they seem to accept the previous Rebbeim- especially the Alter Rebbe, but seem to reject the Rebbe. I dont get it. What do they have against the Rebbe? Is it just that it's Zeh Leumas Zeh? Or what? it makes me so upset. and what does it bother them so much? if we're happy, and we follow the Rebbe, let us be! why does it bother them? we're not making them become the Rebbe's chassidim!

Most of the non-Lubavitch accept the Rebbe as a great Rebbe who commit his life for the Torah and the Jewish people. But some people don't accept some chabad traditions like the idea to open the Rebbe books to ask him some questions. For my side, I don't agree with this tradition, even I used to open his books to ask him also. I think that we should ask directly the G.d

[Torah613]

The answer is simple: There is no such "Chabad tradition".

[ilovejudaism]

ok, perhaps its not a chabad tradition, but I know some lubavitch people that open the Rebbe Books to ask him . For myself, I tried twice, but my Rav told me that its not right to do it. So , I would like to know if the lubavitch people doing it are not in the truth, or if its really working, why not to do it.

[chossidnistar]

Originally Posted by ilovejudaism

ok, perhaps its not a chabad tradition, but I know some lubavitch people that open the Rebbe Books to ask him . For myself, I tried twice, but my Rav told me that its not right to do it. So , I would like to know if the lubavitch people doing it are not in the truth, or if its really working, why not to do it.

if your Rav told you not to do it ,this is the correct thing to do.

The Rebbe said that when someone has a question, he can ask 3 doctors, or 3 knowledgeable pp,never said to find an answer opening a book

[Torah613]

Originally Posted by ilovejudaism

ok, perhaps its not a chabad tradition, but I know some lubavitch people that open the Rebbe Books to ask him . For myself, I tried twice, but my Rav told me that its not right to do it. So , I would like to know if the lubavitch people doing it are not in the truth, or if its really working, why not to do it.

Not everything that "works", is meant to be done.

[noahidelaws]

I really think you need more of a solid background before getting into this sort of discussion, IloveJudaism. Also, speaking with a real, live rabbi is much more likely to bear fruit.

[mosheh5769]

Originally Posted by ilovejudaism

ok, perhaps its not a chabad tradition, but I know some lubavitch people that open the Rebbe Books to ask him . For myself, I tried twice, but my Rav told me that its not right to do it. So , I would like to know if the lubavitch people doing it are not in the truth, or if its really working, why not to do it.

Lubavitch is not perfect and don't believe that everything a Lubavitcher says or does is "Lubavitch" or approved by the Rebbe.

There are things more important in Chabad you should learn like how do we define ahavas yisroel, how to make this world a better place to live in, etc., instead of wasting your time with trivialities.

[noahidelaws]

I dispute the suggestion that writing to the Rebbe, and the way one chooses to do so, is a "triviality".

Lubavitch is not perfect and don't believe that everything a Lubavitcher says or does is "Lubavitch"

On that topic, see here.

[mosheh5769]

Originally Posted by noahidelaws

I dispute the suggestion that writing to the Rebbe, and the way one chooses to do so, is a "triviality".

This is not what I said. This is "triviality" in the sense that Ilovejudaism has more important things to learn from Lubavitch than knowing how to use Igros Kodesh (and the danger that such practice replace the Rebbe's directives concerning submiting our questions to a Rov, a human and living Rov; you know, some use it as a "talisman") or the Kashrus of that practice. Ilove judaism shouldn't bother with such questions and questionable practices. If he loves Judaism and Chabad as he seems to indicate, he should know that in Judaism and Chabad Chasidus in particular there are more important things to know and to do than asking something through Igros Kodesh. And are the "answers" always related to the actual "questions"??? Admit that in many cases, it's hasardous, so yes, in that sense such practice is "triviality", and in fact, you said the same thing as me but in other words:

Originally Posted by noahidelaws

I really think you need more of a solid background before getting into this sort of discussion, IloveJudaism. Also, speaking with a real, live rabbi is much more likely to bear fruit.

So, you see, given the actual level of Ilovejudaism, to bother with Igros Kodesh is "triviality".

By the way, thx for the above link. I don't question those who use Igros Kodesh, but we should admit that because of such practice of some, rabbonim are no longer consulted when it's needed and they are even sometimes not respected at all when they dare questioning the "answer" or giving another interpretation of what ploni and ploni received through Igros Kodesh. It has become a "talisman" for some. And I have observed that many of those who use Igros Kodesh on a regulat basis are "lunatic" people who live in a parallel world far from the true world and sometimes people who refuse the autority of many Torah scholar Lubavitch Rabbis because there are not from their camp (I don't want to open this eternal debate).

[noahidelaws]

Just because some people abuse it, that doesn't make it inherently wrong. And I have observed plenty of perfectly normal people who use the igros regularly and are quite matzliach.

[Torah613]

And how does that prove anything. Many things "work" - but does not make them correct.

[mosheh5769]

Egyptian magicians were able to reproduce some of the signs of Moshe...

[mosheh5769]

Even if it is true that it may work (what I never denied because I also know some devouted chosidim for whom it "worked"), what makes it work? Second, what is the criteria used for deciding that a question was more deserving being asked to the Igros rather than to a living soul in a body Rabbi? Three, what do you do if you asked a question about whether or not you have to go to Israel for some days of rest and that you get an answer about a child with a serious incurable disease? You'll begin to create your own interpretations of the letter until you find one that matches the answer you expected from the Rebbe. It is arbitrary and risky, and often because people do not want to admit that the response does not match anything in the question asked, they will arrange the "answer" to work anyway. In other words, often it's people themselves who will shape their response.

Whether it works or not, better to ask a Neshomo b'guf gashmis Rabbi

[chossidnistar]

Originally Posted by mosheh5769

You'll begin to create your own interpretations of the letter until you find one that matches the answer you expected from the Rebbe. It is arbitrary and risky, and often because people do not want to admit that the response does not match anything in the question asked, they will arrange the "answer" to work anyway. In other words, often it's people themselves who will shape their response.

there are many famous gems coming from Igros
a non jew who was going to convert got an "answer " that he was a Cohen, and got the alya based on that,
finally he did not convert

[noahidelaws]

And how does that prove anything.

I didn't claim it proves anything. I objected to the stereotype of those who use igros as being weird prikas olniks.

[Torah613]

Who said that? Misguided.

[mosheh5769]

Originally Posted by chossidnistar

there are many famous gems coming from Igros
a non jew who was going to convert got an "answer " that he was a Cohen, and got the alya based on that,
finally he did not convert

if this story is true, it is funny and pathetic at the same time.

[mosheh5769]

Originally Posted by noahidelaws

I didn't claim it proves anything. I objected to the stereotype of those who use igros as being weird prikas olniks.

I don't remember someone saying such things.

[Agent40]

Originally Posted by Zeigezunt

I've noticed many times, while reading things on frumteens, and having conversations with non-Lubavitchers, that they seem to accept the previous Rebbeim- especially the Alter Rebbe, but seem to reject the Rebbe. I dont get it. What do they have against the Rebbe? Is it just that it's Zeh Leumas Zeh? Or what? it makes me so upset. and what does it bother them so much? if we're happy, and we follow the Rebbe, let us be! why does it bother them? we're not making them become the Rebbe's chassidim!

Op u have to realize that the Rebbe was a 'controversial figure' he did what no man(Rebbe) did before.
He put women in the forefront, he spoke to frum and non frum alike etc etc etc. These people who belittle, feel threatened, have low self confidence. Call it what u may. Ultimately they feel that if they don't speak up against, then in essence they would be condoning, and how could they ever do that (gasp)?