Jewish Forum & Discussions - Chabad Talk  

Go Back   Jewish Forum & Discussions - Chabad Talk > Torah and Judaism > Moshiach

Reply
Thread Tools Rating: Thread Rating: 2 votes, 5.00 average. Display Modes
Unread 11-14-2007, 12:19 AM   #151
flyaway
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 231
Sounds like a supposed letter I saw in a mikvah in CH "qouting" Reb Yoel Kahn saying that Meshichistin are more liable than the Haskomo movement! Very nice thing to invent in the name of Reb Yoel!
flyaway is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 11-14-2007, 12:35 AM   #152
Torah613
ChabadTalk.com Elder!
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 11,716
Would you be so kind, and let us know what post you are directly commenting on, and what substantive data point you are bringing to this discussion? You can start by clarifying "what" sounds like a letter you saw, and why and in what way it is so. Thanks.
Or maybe perhaps you are providing some background noise that can be safely ignored?
[למען הדיוק: Actually, the way I heard it directly from R' Yoel several months ago - it was the Reform... ואכמ"ל].
Torah613 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 11-14-2007, 02:01 PM   #153
flyaway
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 231
I was makilng a corlation between what you were "quoting" from Rabbi Altein and this "quote" I saw recently from Reb Yoel! Point - Let not the Antis say that ONLY M's distort!
flyaway is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 11-14-2007, 04:42 PM   #154
MrFinkelstein
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 725
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yankel Nosson View Post
You have the dates right in front of you.

Balak 5751: "we are standing on the threshold of yemos hamoshiach"
10 Kislev 5752: "the days of Moshiach, in which we are found"
There's a video of the Rebbe speaking with R' Mordechai Eliyahu on 5 Cheshvan 5752. The Rebbe says to him that Moshiach is at the door waiting to come in. This is only one month before 10 Kislev 5752. What changed in one month? In Cheshvan he was at the door and in Kislev he was here?????
MrFinkelstein is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 11-14-2007, 05:34 PM   #155
Yankel Nosson
Senior Platinum Member
 
Yankel Nosson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 5,259
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrFinkelstein View Post
There's a video of the Rebbe speaking with R' Mordechai Eliyahu on 5 Cheshvan 5752. The Rebbe says to him that Moshiach is at the door waiting to come in. This is only one month before 10 Kislev 5752. What changed in one month? In Cheshvan he was at the door and in Kislev he was here?????
I don't see the stira.
__________________
Chassidim must study Chassidus--HaYom Yom 21Kislev
Yankel Nosson is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 11-14-2007, 05:49 PM   #156
JewishHiphop
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 1,180
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yankel Nosson View Post
1) Ishpashtusa d'Moshe is ishpastusa, not gilgul.
2) So the Rebbe was hinting for 40 years that some baby born in the year 5710 was the Nosi Hador, bearing the FR's neshoma?! Oy--more chassidus on the double!

Again, let me caution against drawing premature conclusions.
I recall once reading in Toras Menachem that the Rebbe sh'lita once said that all of the Rebbeim of Chabad were all one inyan; I don't recall the exact lashon.
JewishHiphop is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 11-14-2007, 05:55 PM   #157
JewishHiphop
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 1,180
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yankel Nosson View Post
I highly recommend the following sicha, Yud Shvat 5726. It gives quite a clear picture of the Rebbe's description of what happened on Yud Shvat, and thus impacts the whole discussion of "min meisayah" v'chuleh.

Attachment 1198 (online here)


P.S. Gilgul is not ispashtusa d'Moshe.
What is a min meisayah?
JewishHiphop is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 11-14-2007, 07:02 PM   #158
MrFinkelstein
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 725
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yankel Nosson View Post
I don't see the stira.
I didn't mean there's a stira. I was trying to point out that when the Rebbe said we're already in the days of Moshiach he didn't mean that the geula is here. He meant Yemos HaMoshiach in a looser way, because just one month before he said that Moshiach was waiting at the door.
MrFinkelstein is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 11-14-2007, 07:29 PM   #159
Yankel Nosson
Senior Platinum Member
 
Yankel Nosson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 5,259
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrFinkelstein View Post
I didn't mean there's a stira. I was trying to point out that when the Rebbe said we're already in the days of Moshiach he didn't mean that the geula is here. He meant Yemos HaMoshiach in a looser way, because just one month before he said that Moshiach was waiting at the door.
I think that learning the letter of the Rebbe Rashab (which the Rebbe references in various places as "hamichtav hayadua") will make more clear the sequence of the geulah process (yemos hamoshiach, plural).

In that letter, the Rebbe Rashab breaks down the sequence (as outlined in the other thread):
  1. Bias Moshiach (b'helem, more or less)
  2. Peulos Moshiach (fighting the wars of Hashem, Building BHM, Kibbutz Goliyos)
  3. Bias Moshiach (referring to hisgalus b'einei kol yisroel)
  4. Tchiyas Hameisim

The most that can be claimed is that we have reached some stage in Peulos Moshiach, which by definition occurs over time with a limited level of hisgalus.

Then your question is: where does the geulah fit in?

Good question, but I wouldn't get hung up on it.
__________________
Chassidim must study Chassidus--HaYom Yom 21Kislev
Yankel Nosson is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 11-14-2007, 08:08 PM   #160
Intrigued
Senior Member
 
Intrigued's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 213
Light

Farshtais Yiddish?

Even if not you'll get a sense of the Rebbe's meaning of hu bachayim:

http://www.770live.com/En770/770vide...=3&vid=3&spd=1
Intrigued is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 11-14-2007, 08:58 PM   #161
MrFinkelstein
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 725
Chelek Beis - "there has been and will be before" - is either the category of "kamim miyad" or it is a 3rd category that can happen before the geula and even to someone who had not even begun any peulos before he passed away.

But how can I say "even to someone who had not even begun peulos before he passed away"? Because the people who had TH in the category of "there has been" did not necessarily start any peulos. And the FR had not necessarily started any peulos in the dor of geula before he passed away. And this is the way RYK understands it. He says that this 3rd category can happen even to someone who has not started peulos. The Rebbe doesn't say here that this "possible" 3rd category of TH is only for someone who began peulos Moshiach in the dor of Moshiach before he passed away. He says it's a special TH for "yechidim" - plural - not just for the one who begins peulos in the dor of geula, i.e. not just for Moshiach who passes away before the geula.

So David Hamelech could have this 3rd kind of TH and become Moshiach. But the Rebbe says he can't be Moshiach. Conclusion: there is no 3rd category of TH and the Rebbe was only speaking about "kamim miyad" in chelek beis.

So, there is no source for there being a TH for anyone until the geula. TH happened in the times of the shas but it won't happen again until the geula.
MrFinkelstein is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 11-14-2007, 10:18 PM   #162
Torah613
ChabadTalk.com Elder!
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 11,716
Quote:
Originally Posted by flyaway View Post
I was makilng a corlation between what you were "quoting" from Rabbi Altein and this "quote" I saw recently from Reb Yoel! Point - Let not the Antis say that ONLY M's distort!
In that case, I take it that you perused what R' Altein wrote, and found that he distorted the sicha? In that case, instead of making wild statements, can you write something of substance (for a change), and (in a Torah'dig fashion), explain to us what is wrong with what he wrote? Otherwise, the conclusion I will draw from your post is the reaction I usually have when I see a post of yours...
Or are you saying that I distorted what he wrote? In that case, pray tell, what exactly did I distort? Or shall I draw the abovementioned conclusion?
Torah613 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 11-14-2007, 10:52 PM   #163
flyaway
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 231
וממשיך: "ולא כמו אלה שרוצים "פארוואסערן" את הענין ולפרש שעי"ז שזרעו בחיים הרי זה כאילו הוא הי' בחיים" - והרבי שולל סברא זו בתוקף, כי מזה שהגמ' משווה את שני הענינים מוכח דאף הוא בחיים באותו אופן דזרעו בחיים.
I appologize for accusing YOU as the distorter, but it's very very vague and unclear and I feel like he threw a cloud of smoke to try to confuse us! Please clarify how that comes to mean that the Rebbe is not alive, the Rebbe is not Moshiach and Moshiach's
not here!
flyaway is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 11-14-2007, 10:53 PM   #164
flyaway
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 231
Quote:
Otherwise, the conclusion I will draw from your post is the reaction I usually have when I see a post of yours...
Ahavas Yisroel?!
flyaway is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 11-15-2007, 08:48 AM   #165
Intrigued
Senior Member
 
Intrigued's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 213
Quote:
A written record has arrived here (from Eretz Yisrael) of a sichah delivered by my revered father-in-law, the Rebbe [Rayatz],[671] when he was still in Russia, concerning the complete Redemption. There he said: "This will take place in my days!"

These words of the Rebbe -- that the Redemption will take place in his days -- are still valid. The present situation, in these few months, does not constitute an interruption, because now, too, he judges Israel.
FRom
Proceeding Together — Volume 3 — Tishrei-Teves, 5711
Talks by the Lubavitcher Rebbe,
Rabbi Menachem M. Schneerson
After the Passing of the Previous Rebbe,
Rabbi Yosef Yitzchak Schneersohn
on Yud Shvat 5710 [1950]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chayei-Sarah/Kislev: Body Higher Than Soul
Intrigued is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 11-15-2007, 09:07 AM   #166
MrFinkelstein
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 725
Quote:
Originally Posted by Intrigued View Post
FRom
Proceeding Together — Volume 3 — Tishrei-Teves, 5711
Talks by the Lubavitcher Rebbe,
Rabbi Menachem M. Schneerson
After the Passing of the Previous Rebbe,
Rabbi Yosef Yitzchak Schneersohn
on Yud Shvat 5710 [1950]
Thanks for this.

Regarding HM 11:4, "im lo hitzliach ad koh" - can this be said on someone who is still alive (i.e. hasn't passed away)? No, because as long as he's still alive there is still hope that he will make a come back and succeed. So this can only be said on someone who was nistaleik. Furthermore, if it were possible for the one who passed away before he succeeded "ad koh" to have TH and then continue his peulos or even begin again, then the Rambam would not be able to say "b'yadua (it is known) that this is not the one the Torah promised." Therefore, it seems clear according to the Rambam that a man who didn't succeed "ad koh" and was nistaleik has no chance of having a TH before the geula, continuing his peulos and becoming Moshich vadai.

Also, if you want to make the argument that this doesn't apply to someone who began peulos in the dor of geula and passed away before the geula, then again the Rambam would not have been able to say "b'yadua (it is known) that this is not the one the Torah promised" - because only Hashem would know if he passed away in the dor of geula or not. There's always a possibility that it's the dor of geula. Only Hashem knows. So the Rambam couldn't say "it is known he's not the one".

Does this make sense what I'm saying?


P.S. T613, I read that article (#729) last night and this is what I got out of it.
MrFinkelstein is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 11-15-2007, 08:55 PM   #167
Torah613
ChabadTalk.com Elder!
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 11,716
On the surface, it seems right (to me).
Torah613 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 11-15-2007, 09:00 PM   #168
MrFinkelstein
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 725
Quote:
Originally Posted by Torah613 View Post
On the surface, it seems right (to me).
What about a little bit below the surface? The pnimius is the ikkar. Seriously, what do you mean on the surface? Do you mean "lechora"?
MrFinkelstein is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 11-15-2007, 10:52 PM   #169
Torah613
ChabadTalk.com Elder!
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 11,716
Meaning I don't have the much time to put in to this, but it sounds right to me.
Torah613 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 11-16-2007, 01:12 PM   #170
flyaway
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 231
And wrong to me...
flyaway is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 11-16-2007, 01:37 PM   #171
MrFinkelstein
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 725
Quote:
Originally Posted by flyaway View Post
And wrong to me...
Why do you think the Rebbe says that Dovid HaMelech cannot be Moshiach b'atzmo?

If he can't because peulos have to be close to the geula, then why can't Dovid HaMelech have TH before geula and then start peulos before geula?

If he can't because peulos have to be both close to the geula and before TH, then how could Daniel be Moshiach b'atzmo as per the literal meaning of the gemarra?

And if Daniel can't be Moshiach b'atzmo, what is the source for a resurrected Moshiach that is not based on Sanhedrin 98b?
MrFinkelstein is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 11-20-2007, 09:25 AM   #172
MrFinkelstein
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 725
Quote:
Originally Posted by Torah613 View Post
Several short weeks before 27 Adar, the Rebbe envisioned TH (any stage) not happening for quite a while...
What is the source for this?
MrFinkelstein is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 11-20-2007, 09:45 AM   #173
Torah613
ChabadTalk.com Elder!
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 11,716
A sicha the Rebbe said, where he thus expressed himself.
Torah613 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 11-20-2007, 09:56 AM   #174
MrFinkelstein
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 725
Quote:
Originally Posted by Torah613 View Post
A sicha the Rebbe said, where he thus expressed himself.
Which sicha?


When I get PM, can you PM it to me?
MrFinkelstein is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 11-20-2007, 12:15 PM   #175
Intrigued
Senior Member
 
Intrigued's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 213
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrFinkelstein View Post
Which sicha?


When I get PM, can you PM it to me?
Why, is it a secret?

Or is it dependent on learning it al pi Toras T613
Intrigued is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Igros Kodesh: Have a Story to Share? Lubamessimaniac Stories about the Rabbeim and Chassidim 181 12-29-2006 12:56 PM
Yechi HaMelech. The true meaning kolelboy Controversy 23 09-14-2005 03:44 AM
Bitul, Panentheism and Antinomianism jjbaker The World of Lubavitch 82 07-06-2005 11:50 PM
LeChayim & the use of alcohol Tzemach Farbrengen 75 02-18-2005 12:24 AM
Not to Mention Moshiach at All - Good or Bad? Vayaaminu Controversy 140 01-29-2004 10:35 AM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:57 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
2001 - 2016 ChabadTalk.com