| Revision as of 20:51, 30 December 2009 editZsero (talk | contribs)12,092 edits →Edits to Rabbi Elazar Shach Page & the lack of an Oposition Section In the Rebbe's Page← Previous edit | Revision as of 21:05, 30 December 2009 edit undoWinchester2313 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users1,763 edits →Edits to Rabbi Elazar Shach Page & the lack of an Oposition Section In the Rebbe's PageNext edit → | ||
| Line 24: | Line 24: | ||
| Hi,on the Rabbi ] page you expanded the "Opposition to the Lubavitcher Rebbe" section considerably. Do you feel that the information should also be added to the Rabbi ] page? I find it interesting that the Rebbe's page has no mention at all of any opposition to the Rebbe. | Hi,on the Rabbi ] page you expanded the "Opposition to the Lubavitcher Rebbe" section considerably. Do you feel that the information should also be added to the Rabbi ] page? I find it interesting that the Rebbe's page has no mention at all of any opposition to the Rebbe. | ||
| : Why should there be? It's a fact about his opponents, not about him. -- ] (]) 20:51, 30 December 2009 (UTC) | : Why should there be? It's a fact about his opponents, not about him. -- ] (]) 20:51, 30 December 2009 (UTC) | ||
| That would be, imho, historically dishonest. What I added was accurate historical context, sourced in many media reports. R'Shachs public/media presence during the 80's & 90's was defined by his frequent attacks on Chabad. This was fodder for the Israeli media, and it got R'Schach some coverage. Contrast this with the media coverage of Chabad in the US during those years, and the opposition in Israel barely made the comments section. It was also largely ignored by the mainstream in the US at the time. Check out the Israeli media reports of Chabad/Schach during those years, and contrast that with the press coverage in the rest of the world - it was largely a non-issue outside Israel. Chabad & the LR were making the news roughly weekly for any number of reasons / campaigns / contro's / events. R'Schach made press only for attacks and criticisms. | |||
| The record does not lie... | |||
| ] (]) 21:05, 30 December 2009 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 21:05, 30 December 2009
Welcome!
Welcome to Misplaced Pages, Winchester2313! I am Pharaoh of the Wizards and have been editing Misplaced Pages for quite some time. I just wanted to say hi and welcome you to Misplaced Pages! If you have any questions, feel free to leave me a message on my talk page or by typing {{helpme}} at the bottom of this page. I love to help new users, so don't be afraid to leave a message! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
- Introduction
- The five pillars of Misplaced Pages
- How to edit a page
- Help pages
- How to write a great article
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Oh yeah, I almost forgot, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); that should automatically produce your username and the date after your post. If you need help, check out Misplaced Pages:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Again, welcome!
Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 06:15, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
"Essence and Being placed into a body"
You added:
- This concept is mentioned often in the classic Kaballistic and Chassidic texts, such as Pardes Rimonim 16:6 and 22:3 by Rabbi Moshe Cordovero, Zohar-2 38a, and Zohar-3 79b, and Sefer Tanya ch. 22 & 23.
- See also Zohar-1 9a, Zohar-2 163b, Mechilta on Exodus 18, Bereishit Rabba 63 & 86, Tanchuma Tissa 27, and the well-known Chassidic principle ascribing fundamentally the same status to the soul of any Jew, as elaborated on by R. SZ of Liadi in Tanya ch.2.
Do these sources specify that there talking about "atzmus u'mahus" itself? Yonoson3 (talk) 20:50, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
- I'm traveling now, and don't have access to my seforim, however, those sources I quoted that I did manage to check via copies of their respective texts that I found online, various tzadikim are alternately referred to as "shechinta" "hashem" "pnei ha'odon hashem" and "e-l". The reference made by the LR re. "atzmus umehus" was simply a mention of this unique status accorded to a rebbe/tzaddik/nossi etc. (IIRC, in the Baal haTanya's 'likkutei torah' he uses the same term, but I couldn't pull up that text online.) Were said mention to have been made in context of a discussion of different levels of Gdliness, the specific choice of term may have been material - but in this case it slearly was not. Interestingly, this concept is rarely mentioned in chabad texts, compared to the frequent mention of same in seforim like the Noam Elimelech etc. See also Rashi on the passuk "vayikra lo kel elokei yisroel..." Winchester2313 (talk) 02:13, 30 December 2009 (UTC)
Edits to Rabbi Elazar Shach Page & the lack of an Oposition Section In the Rebbe's Page
Hi,on the Rabbi Elazar Shach page you expanded the "Opposition to the Lubavitcher Rebbe" section considerably. Do you feel that the information should also be added to the Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson page? I find it interesting that the Rebbe's page has no mention at all of any opposition to the Rebbe.
- Why should there be? It's a fact about his opponents, not about him. -- Zsero (talk) 20:51, 30 December 2009 (UTC)
That would be, imho, historically dishonest. What I added was accurate historical context, sourced in many media reports. R'Shachs public/media presence during the 80's & 90's was defined by his frequent attacks on Chabad. This was fodder for the Israeli media, and it got R'Schach some coverage. Contrast this with the media coverage of Chabad in the US during those years, and the opposition in Israel barely made the comments section. It was also largely ignored by the mainstream in the US at the time. Check out the Israeli media reports of Chabad/Schach during those years, and contrast that with the press coverage in the rest of the world - it was largely a non-issue outside Israel. Chabad & the LR were making the news roughly weekly for any number of reasons / campaigns / contro's / events. R'Schach made press only for attacks and criticisms. The record does not lie...