bible – TORAH METAPHYSICS

Debunking Chabad Philosophers

Belief in speculative, heretical principles can cause Jews to lose their share in the next world. There seem to be many “Chabad philosophers” presenting ideas that conflict with traditional Torah sources. Jews who listen to lectures by Chabad philosophers should ask – where are authentic Torah sources for this philosopher’s opinions?

In this article, the term “Chabad philosopher” refers to Chabad Chassidim who are presenting public lectures containing speculative philosophic notions that seriously conflict with traditional Torah principles or theology. The “Chabad philosophers” may often have long beards and black hats, and they may create an impression of being learned in esoteric Torah principles, but these “philosophers” will usually not cite any valid traditional Torah sources for their invented speculative notions.

In this video, Chabad philosopher Manis Friedman objects to the concept that God does not possess body parts that humans do have. Friedman states that “there is something wrong with that whole concept…as if humans have things that don’t belong to God, He (God) doesn’t have it, only humans have it which doesn’t really make much sense…aren’t we created in his image?”.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L6LfO1wfudA

Rambam (Maimonides) compiled the 13 Ikkarim (foundational principle of Torah Judaism) that present an authentic Torah intellectual belief system. These 13 Ikkarim have become widely accepted as representing authentic principles of Torah Judaism.

The Rambam’s Fourth Ikkar of his 13 principles is creation ex-nihilo (from nothing). Thus the concept that the whole Universe, including humans, should necessarily have physical properties that God does not possess makes perfect sense when one considers that the normative Torah belief is that God created the matter and energy of the Universe ex-nihilo (from nothing).

It is very clear from many sources that the normative Torah viewpoint from before the time of the Rambam over 800 years ago is that God has no physical properties. He created matter and energy from nothing, but He is not comprised of matter or energy. This is actually the Rambam’s Third Ikkar (principle) – “God is not a body or a force in a body”.

Beliefs that God has a body (or physical characteristics) were rejected by the greatest rabbis in history, such as Rav Saadiah Gaon, R’ Bachya Ibn Pakudah, Ran etc. Such beliefs are considered meenus (intellectual idolatry). Here I will cite an authentic, widely accepted Torah source. According to Rambam’s Mishneh Torah, Hilchot Teshuvah 3:7, one who accepts that God exists but that He has a body or form is a “min” who has no share in the world to come (olam habaah).

The concept of Man being “created in God’s image” is in no way suggesting that God has any physical properties like Man has. Being “created in God’s image” is referring to immaterial properties of Man such as Man’s intellect and Man’s knowledge of good versus evil.

Another claim made by philosopher Friedman is that our arms are not real. This seems to derive from the dangerous error promoted by Chabad that the Universe itself is not real because everything in the Universe is allegedly God. Rabbi Samson Rafael Hirsch in his commentary on Genesis 1:4 wrote that this concept is a “deplorable error”.

Thus we see where a Chabad philosopher, even if he has a long beard and black hat, may present his own invented philosophy that is seriously in conflict with ancient Torah principles, where the Chabad philosopher fails to bring any authenticTorah sources that validate his speculative principles.

For those interested in studying the Rambam’s 13 principles as explained in detail by authentic Torah scholars, I recommend the Artscroll English/Hebrew volume “Kisvei HaRambam” on the Rambam’s writings, includes a detailed study of the 13 Ikkarim, written by authentic Torah scholars.
(Note: I don’t work for Artscroll nor do I receive any compensation for mentioning this.)
https://www.artscroll.com/Books/9781422633021.html

Belief in speculative, heretical principles can cause Jews to lose their share in olam habaah (the next world). Unfortunately, there seem to be many “Chabad philosophers” who may be presenting ideas that conflict with traditional Torah sources. Jews who continue to listen to lectures by Chabad philosophers should be constantly asking – where are authentic Torah sources for this philosopher’s opinions?

CHABAD REPLACEMENT THEOLOGY (4)

Certain Chabad writers have greatly distorted the Rambam’s writings in regards to Moshiach to prove that the deceased Chabad rebbe is Moshiach. This bears resemblance to the Christian censors that mistranslated or deleted writings of the Jewish prophets that proved that the false Moshiach Jesus was not the Moshiach.

Certain Chabad writers and Meshichistim have greatly distorted the Rambam’s writings in regards to Moshiach in order to prove that the deceased Chabad rebbe is Moshiach. This bears resemblance to the Christian censors that mistranslated or deleted writings of the Jewish prophets that proved that the false Moshiach Jesus was not the Moshiach.

This article on a Chabad website is a good example of Chabad replacement theology on the subject of Moshiah.

https://www.chabadspringfield.com/the-rebbe-as-moshiach

The article linked above contains numerous falsifications, distortions and omissions of the Rambam’s writings on Moshiach:

‘we have received a prophecy that “the time for the redemption has arrived,”’ – Authentic prophecy ceased in ancient times. No Torah authorities outside Chabad, to my knowledge, have claimed that the “time for the redemption has arrived”. That claim is a figment of imagination among the Chabad Meshichistem.
The Rambam (Maimonides) wrote in his Mishneh Torah “‘If a king will arise from the house of David…”. No king has arisen in the Land of Israel since ancient times. A Jewish king must be annointed by the Sanhedrin (Rambam, Laws of Sanhedrin). The Rambam did not write that Moshiach is a ‘leader’, it is clear from the Jerusalem Talmud description of the Jewish king Bar Kochbah and the Rambam that Moshiach must be a Jewish king in the Land of Israel. The deceased Chabad rebbe was never a Jewish king and he was never in the Land of Israel.
The Rambam (Maimonides) wrote in his Mishneh Torah that the Moshiach “will compel all of Israel to walk in the ways of the Torah”. The deceased Chabad rebbe never accomplished that, nor did the Chabad rebbe accomplish the primary tasks that are required of Moshiach.
Similar to the Christians who censored the Jewish prophets, the Chabad article linked above deleted a whole halacha from the Rambam’s Mishneh Torah. This halacha disqualifies both Jesus and the deceased Chabad rebbe from being Moshiach: “If he (the Moshiach) did not succeed to this degree or was killed, he surely is not the redeemer promised by the Torah. Rather, he should be considered as all the other proper and complete kings of the Davidic dynasty who died. God caused him to arise only to test the many, as Daniel 11:35 states: ‘And some of the wise men will stumble, to try them, to refine, and to clarify until the appointed time, because the set time is in the future.'” (Mishneh Torah, Kings and Wars, 11:5) The halacha cited above proves that according to the Rambam, once a person dies, they can no longer be considered Moshiach.
The Chabad article claims that “The Arizal writes that Moshiach will first redeem himself…”. There are apparently no manuscripts available written by the Arizal. The claims about the Arizal’s teachings were written long after he died in the 16th century. There is no authentic source in Judaism that the Moshiach appears, begins his mission, then dies, and is resurrected to complete his mission. That concept is from a different Bible than the Jewish Bible.

Another example of “replacement theology” is this article on Chabad dot org:

https://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/101744/jewish/Laws-Concerning-Kings-and-the-Messiah.htm

The article linked above omits the Rambam’s statement in Mishneh Torah, Kings and Wars, 11:5 “Rather, he should be considered as all the other proper and complete kings of the Davidic dynasty who died. God caused him to arise only to test the many, as Daniel 11:35 states: ‘And some of the wise men will stumble, to try them, to refine, and to clarify until the appointed time, because the set time is in the future.'”

There are erroneous claims that the Rambam only eliminated “candidates” for Moshiach who were killed. In fact the Rambam’s statement in Kings and Wars, 11:5 eliminates as Moshiach ANYONE who died. It doesn’t matter how he died.

Claims that the Rambam only eliminated as candidates for Moshiach men who were killed is replacement theology. It seems that Chabad censors are folliwing in the desperate tracks of the Christian censors.

Man’s Distinction from Animals

Darwinist imagination can never explain Man’s ability for speech, language, writing, and intellectual reasoning as resulting from un-directed natural causes (IE evolution). These abilities could only be granted by a supernatural Creator.

The Biblical text was not intended as a precise scientific document, but it does describe essential facts that Man needs to know, including the two phases of Man’s creation.

These phases correspond to the scientific evidence we have.

Phase I:

“And God formed the man of dust from the ground, and he blew into his nostrils the soul of life, and man became a living being”

(Genesis 2:7)

The term “living being” used in Genesis 2:7 is the same term used in Genesis chapter 1 to describe the animals that God created before Man.

The great rabbinic sage Sforno explains that in phase I primitive Man existed as a higher form of animal, but still an animal similar to all the other animals which are lacking the ability of speech and intellectual reasoning.

We might conclude from this that these animal like humans could have existed for hundreds of thousands of years, but it is evident they left no evidence of language, writing, civilization, or abstract thought.

Line drawings on a cave wall, with no evidence of language or abstract thought, do not really distinguish primitive Man from animals.

Phase II:

“God planted a Garden in Eden, to the East, and placed there Man whom He had formed.” (Genesis 2:8)

The rabbinic sage Sforno explains that the “Garden” is the location where Man received the “image of God” so that higher Man gained the ability for speech and intellectual reasoning that primitive Man and animals are lacking.

This second phase would have occurred less than 6000 years from the present time, IE in the year 5786 according to the Jewish calendar that counts from the creation of higher Man.

Honest scientists will admit that the oldest writing that exists is less than 6000 years old, which was the period when Man was placed in the “Garden” and received the “image of God”.

No amount of Darwinist imagination can explain Man’s ability for speech, language, writing, and intellectual reasoning as resulting from un-directed natural causes (IE evolution). These abilities could only be granted by a supernatural Creator.

LEARNING AUTHENTIC TORAH PHILOSOPHY

Rambam (Maimonides) taught 13 Ikkarim (principles) that are an authentic Torah intellectual belief system.

By dabbling in “Kabbalah”, which often does not represent an authentic Torah mesorah (tradition), or else relying on substandard Torah scholarship, or relying on biased Torah sources with an agenda, one may come to accept a false or erroneous Torah intellectual belief system.

It is important to study the 13 principles from authentic Torah scholars. An example of this is the excellent Artscroll English/Hebrew volume “Kisvei HaRambam” on the Rambam’s writings, including the 13 Ikkarim. (Note: I don’t work for Artscroll nor do I receive any compensation for mentioning this.)

https://www.artscroll.com/Books/9781422633021.html

It seems that the Rambam has been distorted or revised in various places to advance certain agendas which are contrary to the Rambam’s teachings.
An unfortunate example of a distortion of the Rambam’s Ikkarim is this page on the main Chabad site:

“The following are the criteria for identifying the Moshiach, as written by Maimonides: If we see a Jewish LEADER…INFLUENCES the Jews to follow the ways of the Torah”

https://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/1121893/jewish/Who-Is-Moshiach-the-Jewish-Messiah.htm )

However the Rambam in Hilchot Melachim 11:4 writes “If a KING from the House of David will arise…and he will COMPEL ALL of Israel to follow (the Torah)”.

By misquoting the Rambam’s words where he states that Moshiach is a king who compels all Jews to follow the Torah, and instead claiming Moshiach is a “leader” who “influences the Jews”, the false notion of the deceased Chabad rebbe being Moshiach can be made compatible with the Rambam.

The deceased Chabad rebbe certainly did vital work influencing many Jews to observe Torah, but he was not a king, and in no way did he compel all of the Jews to observe the Torah.

Chabad Meshichistim Debunked

The Talmud Does not Teach a “Resurrected Moshiach”

The claims we hear nowadays in the Chabad movement about a resurrected Moshiach are from a Bible, but it is not the Jewish Bible. These claims about a resurrected Moshiach utilize blatant falsifications of classical Torah sources. The Talmud Sanhedrin is being misinterpreted by certain persons to claim that the future Moshiach will be a resurrected person. The Talmud Sanhedrin is only explaining that the attributes of the future Moshiach will resemble attributes of certain persons from the past, such as Daniel.

Even if somehow someone could argue that the future Moshiach will be a resurrected Daniel, then any persons living in our time would be excluded from being Moshiach.

Nor does the Rambam ever state anywhere that a deceased person could become a resurrected Moshiach. According to Rambam in Hilchos Melachim, Moshiach must be a living Jewish king in the Land of Israel who must accomplish certain tasks while living to be considered Moshiach. Once a Jewish king dies of any causes he is no longer a candidate for Moshiach.

Here is an excellent video explaining that Judaism does not believe in a dead messiah:

Chabad “Meshichistim” (who claim the deceased Chabad rebbe is Moshiach) are constantly trying to cite the Rambam to prove that somehow the deceased Chabad rebbe is the Moshiach.

Contrary to the Meshichistim, Moshiach must be a living Jewish king in Jerusalem (Rambam, 12th Principle of the 13 Principles).

The claim that the Moshiach can start his mission, then die, and then reappear to finish his mission is debunked in a number of places in the Rambam’s writings, for example:

” והמשיח ימות וימלוך בנו תחתיו ובן בנו וכבר ביאר הנביא את מיתתו לא יכהה ולא ירוץ עד ישים בארץ משפט ויאריך מלכותו ימים רבים עד מאד

But the Messiah will die and his son will reign in his place, and then his grandson. And the prophet has already explained his death: ‘He (the messiah) will not tire and will not be crushed until he puts justice in the world’ (Isaiah 42:5). And his kingdom will continue for a very long time.”

(Rambam’s Commentary to Tractate Sanhedrin, Introduction to Perek Chelek)

In this age we regretfully see that a high percentage of Jews have largely abandoned Torah observance.

Chabad “Meshichistim” who are all over the Internet promoting a Christianized, deceased, false “Moshiach” as “alive and well” provide an additional excuse for secularized Jews to reject traditional Judaism as irrational, irrelevant, and psychotic.

This is an excellent video, produced by an authentic Torah scholar, that explains the messianic process according to authentic Torah sources:

Rav Menashe Klein zt”l was a prominent Torah sage who denounced the Chabad Meshichistim in no uncertain terms.

““This sect of crazies, which falsify the Torah and our sages’ words, to say the Moshiach is dead but is really alive… these are things against our holy Torah,” says Harav Klein, echoing the sentiments and shitos of numerous gedolei Torah v’yirah of the last decades.”

Harav Menashe Klein Denounces Messianics Within Chabad

Everything is NOT from Hashem

The Torah does Not claim “everything that happens is from Hashem”.

“וְעַתָּ֕ה הִנֵּ֛ה צַעֲקַ֥ת בְּנֵי־יִשְׂרָאֵ֖ל בָּ֣אָה אֵלָ֑י וְגַם־רָאִ֙יתִי֙ אֶת־הַלַּ֔חַץ אֲשֶׁ֥ר מִצְרַ֖יִם לֹחֲצִ֥ים אֹתָֽם׃ Now the cry of the Israelites has reached Me; moreover, I have seen how the Egyptians oppress them.” (Exodus 3:9)

“I am very angry with those nations that are at ease; for I was only angry a little, but they overdid the punishment.” (Zechariah 1:15)

On the Exodus verse, Ramban’s commentary explains that the Egyptians are excessively oppressing the Israelites, MORE than Hashem had actually decreed for the Israelites to be oppressed. Therefore Hashem has heard the cries of the Israelites, and Pharaoh and his people will be punished for their oppression of the Israelites. Sforno on that verse also explains that the Egyptians were oppressing the Israelites excessively. Sforno also cites the prophet Zechariah 1:15 that the nations oppressed the Jews excessively, more than Hashem had decreed.

Radak on Zechariah 1:15 explains that Hashem was only angry a little with Israel, and the nations did excessive evil to Israel. Radak also cited Isaiah 47:6 that the nations showed Israel no mercy.

All these citations allow us to respond to some of the deterministic Hareidi “preachers” nowadays that might want us to believe that all evil the Jews suffer is willed by Hashem, and/or the Jews always deserve any punishments meted out to them.

Rather, even when the Jews sin, Hashem did not give the non-Jews a blank check to oppress the Jews to an unlimited extent, so it follows that the nations who oppressed the Jews will be punished.

Chabad Baal Teshuvah

The Chabad articles on this site are especially directed towards Chabad Baalei Teshuvah (returnees to Judaism), although we hope they offer useful material for all Jews.

This site is not advising all Jews to completely avoid the Chabad movement and Chabad synagogues. However we are suggesting that intelligent Jews apply critical thinking skills and ask intelligent questions about Chabad beliefs and practices before accepting that Chabad beliefs and practices represent traditional Judaism.

My knowledge of the Chabad movement is not based on hearsay and second hand information. I learned in Litvish yeshivot, but I also learned in a Chabad yeshiva, and I have davened in Chabad shuls, including Meshichistim shuls. Chabad Meshichistim shuls seemed to me like a type of pre-Constantine “Jewish” Christianity, where the deceased Rebbe became the primary power operating in this world, and we are to wait for his second coming. I also know several ex-Chabad (but still Orthodox) rabbis who left Chabad due to the Meshichistim.

My purpose in writing this section is not to promote any “sinat chinam” (baseless hatred) against Chabadniks or Chassidim, or to malign the Chabad movement. There is no question that the Chabad movement does contain many well-intentioned, pious Orthodox Jews who seek to observe traditional Orthodox Judaism. The network of Chabad houses does provide a home to many newcomers to Judaism, people who might not feel comfortable in various less welcoming, non-Chabad Orthodox synagogues.

However, the Chabad Chassidic movement has also grown very large and prominent. Chabad spokesman may often aggressively present in synagogues, in public media, and in public forums, Chabad’s philosophy as a “one size, fits all” philosophy, or as an “all-inclusive” Torah philosophy. Many Jews who are not necessarily learned in Torah are then influenced by these often grandiose and/or erroneous claims by Chabad spokesmen.

Many Jews, especially Baalei Teshuvah, may be unaware as to the extent that certain aspects of Chabad’s theology, philosophy, and halacha seriously conflicts with classical Torah theology and philosophy. When these issues are publicly raised, Chabad defenders usually try to suppress these discussions by quickly asserting “sinat chinam” (baseless hatred) allegedly against Chabad.

The Chabad articles on this site are intended for thinking Jews who seek to study a broader range of Torah principles than is usually supplied by Chabad, and then apply some critical thinking skills to the various Chabad and non-Chabad Torah principles. In this book I am trying to enable some “consumer choice” for thinking Torah observant Jews. This means that intelligent Torah observant Jews need to be able to investigate various Torah philosophies and principles (even if they conflict with Chabad doctrines) and then decide which Torah doctrines are best suited for their intellect and their spiritual needs. This approach will meet the needs of far more Jews than an approach of dogmatically accepting Chabad’s doctrines as “one size fits all”.

Another major problem is that certain Chabad rabbis seem to be erroneously critiquing non-Chassidic Torah philosophies, and then proclaiming the superiority of Chabad Chassidus over the non-Chassidic Torah philosophies. Certain Chabadniks seem to be often disparaging what they consider to be the erroneous non-Chassidic doctrines of much of the non-Chabad Orthodox Jewish world. Are these Chabadniks tormented by a lurking possibility that classical non-Chassidic Torah philosophy might refute or negate the doctrines of Chabad Chassidus?

The Chabad movement demands the right to promote its concepts as the authentic Torah theology in many public Jewish media to non-Chabadniks. I’m not challenging their right to do so. However, if Chabad objects to its ideas being critiqued, then Chabad should cease attempting, in every Jewish media forum possible, to persuade non-Chabadniks to accept Chabad ideologies.

The articles in this section have been written primarily so that Jews can be aware there are alternative theologies to Chabad theology. Baalei tshuvah (returnees to Judaism) especially need to be aware that Chabad is promoting certain radical theologies, not solely confined to the subject of moshiach, that can present severe conflicts with traditional Judaism. On these controversial subjects, it is vital that baalei tshuvah and other observant Jews have an opportunity to become aware of more traditional Torah viewpoints than Chabad is presenting them.

If you are a thinking Jew that attends a Chabad shul, you should be free to decide, within the boundaries of traditional Orthodox Judaism, which theologies/philosophies are suitable for your mentality and neshama. Even if you regularly attend a Chabad shul, you should not be obligated to accept Chabad’s specific Chassidic philosophy.

Anyone involved with the Chabad movement, especially a Baal Teshuvah, who also seeks out truth within Torah must exercise critical thinking and discretion to avoid blindly accepting false concepts that contradict the foundations of Judaism.