Chabad-Lubavitch related controversies

This article examines controversial issues involving the Chabad-Lubavitch movement. For a more complete examination of Chabad, see the main article.

Chabad-Lubavitch is a branch of Hasidism. Its founder Rabbi Shneur Zalman of Liadi was twice arrested by the Russians on trumped-up charges, and later opposed Napoleon's emancipation of the Jews; one of his sons is alleged to have converted to Christianity. The conduct of the sixth leader, Rabbi Yosef Yitzchok Schneersohn during the Second World War was criticised by some of his contemporaries. Some interpretations of its seventh leader, Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson's theology has been disagreed with by a few of his contemporaries; he felt very strongly that Israeli law should follow Jewish law and ethics, and was criticised heavily by Rabbi Elazar Shach for many of his policies, including his messianic focus. The belief that Schneerson is the messiah and will return or that he never even died has led to some friction within the Chabad community. Since his death in 1994 the movement has fragmented into competing factions. Financial battles have been ongoing between these factions since 1995, and the contested control over the headquarters in Brooklyn has led to strife.

Shneur Zalman of Liadi

Rabbi Shneur Zalman of Liadi

Rabbi Shneur Zalman of Liadi, the founder of the movement, was arrested by Tsar Paul I on two occasions on trumped up charges but released both times. In the face of Napoleonic invasion, Rabbi Schneur Zalman sided with the Tsar, believing that emancipation and freedom would lead to spiritual malaise.

During his life, the controversies between the Hasidim and Mitnagdim intensified in many ways. Some issues involved in the disagreements were the rules for ritual slaughter as well as the conduct and phrasing of prayers. As a result, the Hasidim were subjected to bans, though in part due to the changes made to Hasidic thought this lessened during the lives of Rabbi Schneur Zalman's son, Rabbi Dovber Schneuri and grandson, Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneersohn. Although Shneur Zalman once attempted to see the Vilna Gaon to persuade him to legitimize the Hasidim, the Vilna Gaon refused to speak with him.

Arrests

In 1798 Rabbi Shneur Zalman was arrested on suspicion of treason on trumped up charges and brought to St. Petersburg where he was held in the Petropavlovski fortress for 53 days.

Again in 1800 he was arrested and again transported to St. Petersburg along with his son Moshe who served as an interpreter, as Rabbi Shneur Zalman spoke no Russian or French. He was released after a few weeks but banned from leaving St. Petersburg. The elevation of Tsar Alexander I a few weeks later led to Rabbi Shneur Zalman's release.

According to some scholars Rabbi Shneur Zalman's first arrest was not the result of anti-Hasidic Mitnagdim agitators fabricating charges, or officials seeking extortion monies. An accusation was made on May 8, 1798 by Hirsh ben David of Vilna , who accused Rabbi Shneur Zalman of trying to assist the French Revolution, by sending money to Napoleon and the Sultan. It appears that there was no such person as Hirsh and the authorities were attempting to stir up internecine fighting among the Jews.

Rabbi Shneur Zalman and Napoleon

While some Jewish leaders supported Napoleon or remained quiet about their support, others including Rabbi Shneur Zalman of Liadi openly and vigorously supported the Tsar. While fleeing from Napoleon, Liadi wrote a letter explaining his opposition to Napoleon to a friend, Rabbi Moshe Meizeles:

Should Napoleon be victorious, wealth among the Jews will be abundant. . .but the hearts of Israel will be separated and distant from their father in heaven. But if our master Alexander will triumph, though poverty will be abundant. . . the heart of Israel will be bound and joined with their father in heaven. . . And for God's sake: Burn this letter.

Some argue that Napoleon had been attempting to arouse a messianic view of himself in Jews, opening the gates of the Ghettos and emancipating their residents as he conquered. He established an ersatz Sanhedrin, recruiting Jews to his ranks, and spreading rumors about his conquest of the Holy Land to make Jews subversive for his own ends. Thus, Rabbi Shneur Zalman's opposition was based on a practical fear of Jews turning to the false messianism of Napoleon as he saw it.

Others argue that Rabbi Shneur Zalman's "fears were borne out by the events of the next two centuries. When emancipation did come to European Jewry, it came as a gradual process, and the traditional Judaism had by then developed an array of intellectual and moral responses (most notably, the Chassidic and Mussar movements). Still, the spiritual toll of freedom was high: traditional Jewish life was all but wiped out in France and Germany by the upheavals spearheaded by the French Revolution, and while it persevered in Eastern Europe until the eve of the Holocaust, many fell prey to the winds of anti-religious "enlightenment" blowing from the west. We can only imagine what the toll might have been had Napoleon conquered the continent in the early years of the nineteenth century."

Dovber Shneuri

Main article: Dovber Schneuri

Although Rabbi Dovber Schneuri succeeded his father as Rebbe of the Chabad movement, a senior disciple of his father, Rabbi Aharon HaLevi of Strashelye, a popular and respected figure, differed with him on a number of issues and led a breakaway movement.

Strashelye breakaway

Main article: Strashelye (Hasidic dynasty)

When R' Schneur Zalman died, many of his followers flocked to one of his top students, Rabbi Aharon HaLevi of Strashelye. He had been Shneur Zalman’s closest disciple for over thirty years. While many more became followers of the Mittler Rebbe, the Strashelye school of Chassidic thought was the subject of many of the Mittler Rebbe's discourses. R' Aharon HaLevi emphasized the importance of basic emotions in divine service (especially the service of prayer). The Mittler Rebbe did not reject the role of emotion in prayer, but emphasized that if the emotion in prayer is to be genuine, it can only be a result of contemplation and understanding (hisbonenus) of the explanations of Chassidus, which in turn will lead to an attainment of "bittul" (self-nullification before the Divine). In his work entitled "Kuntres Hispa'alus" (Tract on Ecstasy), the Mittler Rebbe argues that only through ridding oneself of what he considered disingenuous emotions could one attain the ultimate level in Chassidic worship (that is, bittul).

Joseph Isaac Schneersohn

The response of the sixth Rebbe, Rabbi Yosef Yitzchak Schneersohn to the Holocaust has been condemned from a number of quarters. Bryan Mark Rigg wrote his PhD thesis on the subject an Cambridge University. He quotes Rabbi Alex Weisfogel, secretary of Rabbi Avraham Kalmanowitz of the Vaad Hatzalah as saying that Kalmanowitz and Aaron Kotler were appalled at Schneersohn's focus on "bringing the messiah" while the war continued.

However, some say that recently uncovered documents show that Schneersohn immediately began lobbying for assistance to Jews in the Nazis' path.

He petitioned ambassadors and politicians in London and New York for relief packages to be sent to the Jewish communities in the western parts of what is today the former Soviet Union. His letters were co-signed by Rabbi Jacob Rosenheim, the then-president of the Agudath Israel World Organization.

After the war ended, in 1945, he set up a relief organisation to assist the survivors of the Holocaust.

The Malach

Main article: Malachim (Chassidus)

Another incident which occurred was with Rabbi Chaim Avraham Dov Ber Levine haCohen, also known as The Malach (lit. the angel). He was the tutor of Joseph Isaac Schneersohn when the latter was a child, but personal differences caused Rabbi Levine to break with Chabad. Torah Vodaas, in order to inspire its students, used to encourage its students to visit knowledgeable rabbis and Rabbi Levine was one of them. Eventually, some of the students styled themselves as Rabbi Levine's followers. This quasi-Hasidic group, known as The Malachim, is antagonistic towards Chabad and only acknowledges the legitimacy of the first four Chabad rebbes. The Malachim themselves did not choose a successor to Rabbi Levine. Today, the Malachim are a marginal group.

The dispute was apparently over the tutelage of Yosef Yitchok. According to the Malachim, Levine caught him reading a secular book and told his father about the incident. Rabbi Sholom Dovber Schneersohn, the fifth Rebbe of Chabad, did not believe that his son would do this and called tutor and tutee to talk with him. When Yosef Yitzchok promised that he had not read the book, the father accepted his word, and Levine resigned his post.

Menachem Mendel Schneerson

Terminology

In 1950 Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson described his father-in-law the sixth rebbe, and Rebbes in general, as being "the essence and content of God, as it put itself in a body". This is mentioned in his collected sermons Likkutei Sichos He asks how one can make a request of a rebbe - isn't that a problem of speaking to God through an intermediary? (Which is anathematic to Judaism.) He answers that "One cannot ask [this] question. . . since a Rebbe is Atzmus u'mehus alein vi er hat zich areingeshtalt in a guf"--"the essence and substance of God as it put itself in a body". This is the common description in Kabalah for humans, a fusion of soul and body, G-dliness and physical.

In recent years some critics, notably Rabbi Dr. David Berger and Rabbi Chaim Dov Keller, have opined that this is a major innovation by Schneerson that in their view "deifies" the Rebbe, which is contrary to Orthodox Judaism. Chabad writers counter that these reactions are based on misunderstandings of Kabbalistic terminology used by Rabbi Schneerson, and that similar expressions can be found throughout non-Chabad Hasidic and Kabbalistic literature.

Defenders point to similar statements attributed to the Baal Shem Tov, the Ohr ha-Chaim, and many others. They point to a quote from Rabbi Shneur Zalman of Liadi that "He who breathed life into man, breathed from Himself". Therefore a person's soul is "truly a part of HaShem above". They argue that in the light of these statements Schneerson's 1950 comments are not a departure from normative Jewish thought.

Schneerson on the Holocaust

When Schneerson wrote a letter rejecting all theological explanations for the Holocaust, he was accused of comparing the Holocaust to the amputation of a rotting limb.. Upon further analysis, however, it becomes clear that Schneerson's letter stated precisely the opposite. The "rotting limb" analogy was used only to illustrate how things are often different than the way they first appear.

Rabbi Elazar Shach's critique

Rabbi Elazar Shach a long-time leader of Lithuanian Judaism was involved in a number of public disputes with Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson the Rebbe of the Chabad-Lubavitch movement from the 1970s through Rav Schneerson's death in 1994. Rav Shach accused his followers of false Messianism. When certain elements in Chabad actually identified Rabbi Schneerson as the possible Messiah, Rabbi Shach advocated a complete boycott of Chabad, its institutions and projects by its constituents. He objected to the call for "forcing" the Messiah's appearance, an idea advocated by the Lubavitcher Rebbe. Pointing to an assertion by the Rebbe in a passage dealing primarily with his predecessor that a rebbe is ‘the Essence and Being [of G-d] placed into a body,’ Rabbi Schach spoke of nothing less than Avodah Zara [idol worship]. His followers refused to eat meat slaughtered by Lubavich shochetim or to recognize Chabad Hasidim as adherents of authentic Judaism. Rabbi Shach also compared Chabad and Rabbi Schneerson to the followers of the 17th-century false messiah Sabbatai Zevi. Chabad representatives dismissed the comparisons, noting that whereas the Sabbateans deliberately violated religious laws on the assumption that a "new Torah" would emerge during messianic times, Chabad preached that only strict adherence to tradition would bring the redemption. Chabad also claimed that its veneration of the rebbe was not at odds with Jewish tradition.

Rabbi Shach once described Schneerson as "the madman who sits in New York and drives the whole world crazy."

In addition to Rabbi Shach's objections to some Chabad members venerating Rabbi Schneerson as the Messiah (both before and after his death), the two also disagreed on various issues of Jewish law and philosophy, but particularly politics. Chabad strongly opposed peace talks with the Palestinians or to relinquishing any Israeli territory under any circumstance, while Rabbi Shach alternately supported both left and right-wing parties in the Israeli elections. During the 1988 elections, Schneerson encouraged Israeli Haredim to vote for Agudat Israel over Rabbi Shach's newly-formed Degel HaTorah party. In response, Rabbi Shach's newspaper, Yated Ne'eman, ran several articles documenting various Chabad writings and statements that supported Rav Shach's contention that Lubavitch was becoming a breakaway sect of Judaism focused around Schneerson as the Messiah.

Chabad characterized Rabbi Shach's opposition to Rabbi Schneerson as being personal in nature, and stemming from private disagreements between the two leaders, but Rav Shach's supporters defended his harsh criticism of Chabad, saying the movement represented a very real threat of turning religious Jews to apostasy. There have been similar concerns regarding Chabad Messianism that have since been raised among Haredi and Modern Orthodox communities in Israel and the United States.

In a conversation that he had with an American rabbi in the 1980s, Rabbi Shach stated, "The Americans think that I am too controversial and divisive. But in a time when no one else is willing to speak up on behalf of our true tradition, I feel myself impelled to do so."

It should be noted that in spite of his pitched battle against Lubavitch, Rabbi Shach nevertheless recited Tehillim when Rabbi Schneerson became sick. At the time he was asked for an explanation, and he obliged, “My battle is against his erroneous approach, against the movement, but not against the people in any personal way. I pray for the Rebbe’s recovery and simultaneously, also pray that he abandon his invalid way.”

Rabbi Shach made clear in his writings that he is not at all opposed to chassidim and chassidus (including Chabad Chassidim from the previous generations ) ; he recognized them as "yera'im" and "shlaymim" and full of Torah and Mitzvos and fear of heaven .

Rabbi Shach often clarified his stand, both in speech and in writing, that the slander spread against him about his persecution of chassidim was something he could never forgive, for it had transformed him into a baal machlokes, a hate-monger, at a time when he loved peace and pursued it to the nth degree.

In 1980, Rabbi Shach and Rabbi Yaakov Yisrael Kanievsky (known as the "Steipler") protested the Chabad Lag Ba'omer parade .

In 1988 Shach explicitly denounced Schneerson as a meshiach sheker (false messiah).

Rabbi Shach is quoted as saying, "Even if I knew for certain that they would burn me alive, I would still not desist in my campaign against false messianism, for this is bona fide avodoh zorah."

Rabbi Shach is quoted as saying, "We are fighting against secularism in the yeshivas. Today, besiyata deShmaya people are learning Torah in both Chassidic and Lithuanian yeshivos. In my view there is no difference between them; all of them are important and dear to me. In fact, go ahead and ask your Chassidic friends with us at Ponevezh if I distinguish between Chassidic and Lithuanian bochurim."

Other Haredi critiques

Rabbi Yitzchok Hutner was opposed to what he is reported to have perceived as a "personality cult" built up around the Lubavitcher Rebbe, and to the public projection of both the Rebbe and the Lubavitch movement, by the movement, through public media—print and broadcast journalism, books, film, and the like.

In an interview with Mishapacha Magazine, Rabbi Yisroel Belsky accused Chabad of having "become a personal cult centered on the previous Lubavitcher Rebbe", and said "There's no room in Yiddeshkeit for a personality cult in which an individual is deified and glorified. Whether he was great or wasn't is immaterial. There have been many great people in Judaism. The personality cult of glorifying an individual person, giving him unique titles, elevating the shape of the building he was active in, etc., has no place in Yiddeshkeit." Chabad Rabbi Elimelech Silberberg responded, in a letter to the magazine, "I can categorically state that none of the Chabad Yeshivas in any way, G-d forbid, 'deifies' the Rebbe. Rabbi Belsky's statement is totally libelous and falls in the category of falsehood and slander. The issue of the role of a tzaddik has always been a point of contention between Chasidim and non-chasidim. A perusal of the works of such Chasidic luminaries as the Meor Ainayim, the Noam Elimelech, and the Tiferes Shlomo, to name just a few, underscores the central role that a Rebbe occupies in the life of a Chasid. Ultimately we have come to respect these differences of opinions between the two communities. For Rabbi Belsky to reiterate this opposition to what he considers to be an improper Chasid-Rebbe relationship only fuels the fires of baseless hatred."

Notwithstanding various denials from within the movement, there remains a large number of primary sources from Rabbi Schneerson's own authorized writings that are perceived by many in mainstream Orthodoxy as, at the very least, resting at the very edge of full heresy.

Chabad messianism

Main article: Chabad messianism

The Chabad messianist flag. The hebrew word is "Moshiach", meaning "Messiah".

Chabad messianism is a belief by some within the Chabad-Lubavitch Hasidic movement that believe that the late Rabbi and leader of that movement Menachem Mendel Schneerson will be the Jewish Messiah. Adherents to this belief are termed Mishichist in Yiddish.

Before Schneerson's death in 1994 a significant body of Chabad Hasidim believed that he was soon to be crowned as the Messiah - an event that would herald the Messianic Age and the construction of the Third Temple. Books and pamphlets were written containing purported proofs for the Rabbi's status as Messiah, some of which Schneerson opposed.

Attempts by his followers to persuade him to reveal himself as the Messiah were to no avail. Followers routinely sang the mantra "Long live our master, our teacher and our rabbi, King Messiah for ever and ever" in his presence - a chant that he often encouraged in his last years, after suffering a stroke, which left him unable to speak and paralyzed on the right side of his body.

During the later years of his life Rabbi Schneerson's teachings were interpreted by many to mean that he was claiming to be the Messiah.

His death in 1994 did not remove the messianist fervor. Believers soon developed new rationales to justify the belief the Schneerson was the Messiah despite being dead. Some argued that he had in fact not died at all and was still physically present. Others argued that though he was dead Judaism did not rule out the possibility of the Messiah returning from the dead.

The development of this messianism and its impact on Chabad in specific — and Orthodox Judaism in general — has been the subject of much discussion in the Jewish press, as well as within the pages of peer-reviewed journals. Nevertheless, the belief in the Lubavitcher Rebbe being the Messiah, is confined to a subset of the Chabad community and is not accepted by Jewish adherents outside of that community.

Yechi

"Yechi Adoneinu Moreinu v'Rabbeinu Melech haMoshiach l'olam vo'ed!" is a phrase used by many Lubavitch Hasidim to pray and proclaim that the seventh Lubavitcher Rebbe, Menachem Mendel Schneerson is the messiah. It means "Long Live our Master, our Teacher, and our Rabbi, King Messiah, for ever and ever." The phrase can be seen printed in various settings, it is chanted by many people at the end of daily communal prayers in Lubavitch congregations, including the main Lubavitch synagogue in Crown Heights. In Oholei Torah/Oholei Menachem, the largest Lubavitch yeshiva outside Israel, Yechi is recited during the service, and an administrative directive declared that any student who cannot behave respectfully during the recitation should go elsewhere. Yechi has a complex and controversial history dating back to the mid-1980s and is often viewed as a litmus test to differentiate the messianists from the anti-messianists or non-messianists.

Shaul Shimon Deutsch

Rabbi Shaul Shimon Deutsch, a former Lubavitcher, started a new Hasidic group, Chabad-Liozna. However he has failed in attracting adherents. He took this title in a ceremony on December 5, 1996 at his synagogue on 45th Street in Brooklyn. He took the name of the town of Liozna in Belorussia where the early Chabad movement was founded with the intent of enticing Chabad followers away from the belief that their late leader was the Messiah. His actions have made him an object of derision within the mainstream Chabad community. He failed in attracting any adherents. He has enlisted almost no supporters having a small synagogue in Boro Park Brooklyn.

Weinstock estate

The "Weinstock estate" case, that dragged through the courts for ten years, divided the highest levels of Chabad administration into two irreconcilable camps.

In 1978 Judah Leo Weinstock bequeathed a $32 million estate to the United Lubavitcher Yeshivot (ULY), a body that oversaw the funding of four Chabad yeshivas, under the direction of Rabbi Shemaryahu Gurary. The donation had been solicited for the ULY by Rabbi Nachman Sudak, a Chabad emissary in London. However, Weinstock had asked that the money be used to establish Yeshivas in Israel, something that ULY was not capable of. Gurary ordered that the monies be distributed evenly between ULY and Merkos L'Inyonei Chinuch (MLC) which maintained Yeshivas outside the US. In 1987 a board of trustees (including Yehuda Krinsky) was established that distributed the money on a discretionary basis between ULY and MLC.

In October 1994, a few months after Schneerson's death ULY fell into financial troubles. The directors of ULY requested large sums from the trustees - eating into the principle of the estate. The directors of the MLC (some of whom were also trustees of the estate) objected to the requests, and the trustees of the estate refused to grant the money.

Furious, the directors of ULY began claiming sole title to the estate, based on a strict reading of Weinstock's original bequest. The ULY took the MLC to court, having failed to agree on a mutually acceptable Beit Din. The previously open relationship between the ULY, MLC and the trustees - while Schneerson was alive - complicated the case, as did the ambiguity in the bequest.

Litigation

Surrogate Judge Michael Feinberg dealt with the case from 1995, when the dispute surfaced until 2000 when he ruled that there had been clear intent to share the money equally between the two organizations, once united but now at loggerheads.

In 1997 the dispute had deteriorated, and a rival ULY board headed by Krinsky claimed to be the rightful representatives of ULY. Feinberg ruled that until the dispute could be settled Mario Cuomo would serve as the emergency receiver, a role he held till 2000. In 2000 Feinberg ruled that since the parties refused to attend any type of Beit Din or arbitration, he had to rule against the original board and for Krinsky since the original board had failed to cooperate with the court-appointed arbitrator. The judge noted that:

There were no questions about the administration of the estate or the proper recipient of the funds with Schneerson calling the shots. With the rebbe's death in 1994, this consensus broke down."

The ruling was a major blow for the ULY board, known as the Vaad, though their lawyers welcomed the decision publicly saying that they could now appeal.

In a final judgement in November 2003, New York Supreme Court ruled that the original course of dealing before 1994 showed intent on behalf of the ULY to share the money evenly with MLC, and that course should continue. Thus, after nine years of litigation, the original ULY board lost their claim for complete control of the Weinstock estate.

Local controversies

Europe

Czech Republic

In Prague in 2005 tensions developed between Chabad members and Rabbi Karol Sidon. The Alt-Neu Synagogue in Prague's ancient Jewish Quarter became the scene of an emotional dispute between members of the Chabad movement and locals backing Karol Sidon, chief rabbi of the Czech Republic. The conflict led to violent brawls and hospitalisations on a number of occasions. Sidon was eventually returned to his post. In 2004 Tomas Jelinek the director of the community council fired Sidon as Rabbi giving the post to young Chabad rabbi Manis Barash. A grassroots campaign from community members led to the deposition of Jelinek as the community director. Jelinek then asked a religious arbiter in Israel to rule on the case who ruled in favor of Barash. Sidon's supporters argued that the case was void since Jelinek had lied to the Judge telling him that the community board had been behind his actions in firing Sidon and appointing Barash. However on 21 November 2005 he was reelected as the chief Rabbi of the city following the protracted dispute with Chabad. Community head Jacub Roth told the press: " this is part of the local Chabad’s striving to take over the community’s religious life. We have seen an ugly foray of Chabad in their attempt to take over the Old-New Shul."

Sholom Ber Krinsky

Rabbi Sholom Ber Krinsky (nephew of Rabbi Yehuda Krinsky) the Chabad emissary to Vilnius has been embroiled in a number of scandals. His soup kitchen was closed down because it served contaminated food. A scandal erupted when charges were made that he had stolen money from donors. Creditors took over the first floor of his Chabad Center to cover unpaid debts, and he remains indebted to his creditors. He collected money to maintain the Jewish cemetery in the city but never paid the $25,000 to the community which was his share in the maintenance.

Krinsky styles himself as Lithuania's "Chief Rabbi", though this was not widely accepted. His attempts to become the officially recognised chief rabbi included having Yona Metzger – who has close ties to Chabad – write a letter to the Lithuanian President; he tried appealing to the Lithuanian Ministry of Justice, but this too failed. On February 29, 2004, he held a meeting of 30 of his followers within the community and declared that they were the religious Jewish community of Lithuania. These people proclaimed him chief rabbi and documentation of the meeting was sent to the Ministry of Justice, but this failed to sway the government who maintained that choosing leaders was the prerogative of a religious community as a whole. In response 400 Jewish Lithuanians signed a document condemning Krinsky.

When the community appointed a Chief Rabbi, Chaim Burstein in early 2004 Krinsky and his followers began a campaign against him. In May 2004 some of Krinsky's followers attacked Burstein on the podium during prayers, and the police were called to break up what became a brawl. Burstein retreated to his home with some supporters to continue prayers but Chabad activists broke in and continued assaulting the worshippers.

The synagogue closed down and was reopened a few weeks later with security at the door to prevent the ingress of Krinsky and his friends. Krinsky attempted to enter and a brawl ensued. Krinsky told the press that the security made him "feel like I went through a Nazi selection." The synagogue was again closed for the duration of the summer, Krinsky and his Chabad followers maintained an angry vigil at the scene that was covered regularly by the local media.

In June 2007 Krinsky was facing eviction from his premises for non-payment of rent, and was given an ultimatum by the community to "publicly acknowledge the community's ownership of the synagogue and its choice of chief rabbi; cease referring to himself as "chief rabbi"; and submit to "a sound, open and transparent financial management".

Russia

Since the installation of Rabbi Berel Lazar as the Chief Rabbi of Russia who was elected by Jewish communities and rabbis from throughout the Former Soviet Union. He is involved by Chabad Federation there have been a number of controversies associated with Chabad influence with premier Vladimir Putin, and their funding from various Russian oligarchs, including Lev Leviev and Roman Abramovich. Lazar is known for his close ties to Putin's Kremlin.

Putin became close to the Chabad movement, since it is the largest Jewish organization in the FSU representing the majority of communities. Some say it was after a number of non-Chabad Jewish oligarchs and Rabbis including Vladimir Gusinsky (the founder of the non-Chabad Russian Jewish Congress), backed other candidates for president. Lev Leviev, a chabad oligarch supported Putin, and the close relationship between them led to him supporting the Chabad federation nomination of Lazar as Chief Rabbi of Russia, an appointment that Putin immediately recognized despite it not having been made by the established Jewish organisation. Some have gone so far as to describe Lazar as Putin's Court Jew; Lazar responded to these allegations:

I do not know what a court Jew is. There are some people whose only purpose is to speak in condemnation of the government. I try to be objective. The situation in Russia has improved under Putin. People get pensions. The standard of living is rising. There are also negative phenomena, which deserve to be criticized. There is corruption at all levels, though that has been characteristic of Russia in the past 80 years. The reform is in bad shape and there are also many other ills.

Rabbi Adolf Shayevich, who had been Chief Rabbi of Russia until 1998, argues that the Lazar is merely the appointee of Chabad and that he remains Chief Rabbi. What happened, he explains, "has nothing to with religion and everything to do with politics and business. The president invites him to receptions and does not invite me. I am not offended."

Rabbi Pinchas Goldschmidt was expelled from Russia by order of the government, after having lived in Russia for fifteen years. According to rival oligarch Vladimir Slutsker Goldschmidt told friends that it was Slutsker that had him expelled due to his opposition to Chabad. Lazer made no protest at the expulsion of his rival, and within days was appointed to Putin's "Public Chamber", a controversial body that human rights groups have criticised as a window dressing exercise, packed with Putin acolytes to "legitimize the government’s increasingly authoritarian policies".

According to an editorial in the Jerusalem Post the reason why Lazar has not protested Putin's arrests of Jewish Oligarchs and Goldschmidt's deportation is that "Russia's own chief rabbi, Chabad emissary Berel Lazar, is essentially a Kremlin appointee who has been made to neutralize the more outspoken and politically active leaders of rival Jewish organizations."

The facts are that today Lazar is head of the largest Jewish group in the FSU, which has over 300 rabbis. They operate the largest network of educational, religious and social service programs in the Former Soviet Union. Their recognition is the result of the fact that they are the leading Jewish group in the country.

Darkei Shalom synagogue

The Darkei Shalom synagogue is a major synagogue in northern Moscow. It was affiliated with Chamah, a religious and social welfare movement on behalf of former Soviet Jews with offices in New York and Israel, as well as Moscow. The spiritual leader of Darkei Shalom, Rabbi David Karpov, is a devotee of the late Lubavitcher rebbe, yet over the years he has distanced himself from FEOR, the Chabad rabbinical grouping in Russia that appointed and is headed by Lazar. Kaprov was telephoned by Lazar telling him that the synagogue was being gifted to the Chabad movement by its owners and that he would have to leave the synagogue, and resign his post to make way for the a new Chabad emissary. Lazar suggested that if he fell into line with FEOR he may be allowed to stay. At the same time Kaprov received court orders over various technical and administrative issues, which Kaprov argued were due to Lazar pressuring Kaprov. In an open letter to Lazar, Rabbi Adolph Shayevich and 16 other rabbis wrote:

We would like to express our deep disappointment and discontent with the recent attempt of FEOR to forcefully capture the Darkei Shalom Congregation, one of the most successful and respected Jewish congregations of Russia. This kind of attitude demonstrated by Rabbi Berel Lazar contradicts the spirit of Torah and is apparently based on typical methods deployed by Russian criminals.

Shayevich added in a statement to the press that "they already have too much money and power, and are using it to destroy all Jewish organizations which resist Chabad’s total domination of Russian Jewish life."

Ukraine

Chabad maintain a Chief Rabbi in the Ukraine in opposition to non-Chabad Chief Rabbi Yaakov Bleich. A group of prominent secular Jews orchestrated the appointment of Rabbi Moshe Reuven Azman - a Chabad messianist to rival Bleich and another Chabad rabbi, Azriel Haikin who had been appointed by Chabad in 2002. His election as Chief Rabbi by a group formed by some wealthy Jewish businessmen in October 2005, caused considerable controversy in the Ukraine Jewish community. Azman's election was endorsed by a group of secular Jewish leaders attending a Kiev Jewish conference, but not by any rabbinical authorities. A group of rabbis from the non-Chabad Russian Jewish Congress attacked the appointment describing it as "illegitimate" and "insulting to the feelings of every believer". 150 secular Jewish leaders from 100 Ukrainian cities and towns later protested the vote as well.

According to the Baltimore Jewish Times, More than 30 Chabad rabbis affiliated with the federation issued a statement Sept. 15 saying that the election of another Chabad rabbi, Moshe Reuven Azman of Kiev, to serve as Ukraine's chief rabbi was "illegitimate" and "insulting to the feelings of every believer. A chief Rabbi can be elected only by rabbis working in Jewish communities of that country," and argued that the election was invalid.

United Kingdom

Gaon Club

The financial troubles at a central London club aimed at attracting professionals, consumed a third of Chabad's total UK budget. Allegations of financial irregularities led to the directors of the Lubavitch Foundation (UK) filing a Beit Din suit against the club's director rabbis Mendy Vogel and Yosef Vogel demanding that they cease and desist from using the Chabad name.

Rabbi Shlomo Levin, director of Lubavitch UK said the Lubavitch Foundation had been "unable to meet its monthly commitments, amassing large debts in unpaid teachers salaries, bank loans and unpaid PAYE." He complained that the Club was responsible for swallowing a large chunk of the movement's budget.

The Gaon club was opened by Chief Rabbi Jonathan Sacks in 2006 and was located in rent-free premises in the West End of London.

The club was closed and the Beit Din ruled that the Vogel brothers must not use the Chabad, Lubavitch or Gaon Club names for at least 6 months and that they should return any Chabad property that they had in their possession. Rabbi Faivish Vogel the father of the two men, who was the chief fundraiser of the "Lubavitch Foundation (UK)" which brought the suit, resigned following the ruling.

It emerged that the foundation is now £1.5million ($3 million) in debt to banks and other individuals. The Vogel brothers expressed their intent to continue their activities despite the ruling: "We are not going anywhere. Our dedication to Anglo-Jewry, and particularly its young people, was not just a job. It was our life, as taught to us by our father who was inspired by the Lubavitcher Rebbe."

Rabbinical Center of Europe

Chabad established a rival rabbinical grouping (called the "Rabbinical Center of Europe") to the Conference of European Rabbis, the primary Orthodox Jewish rabbinical conference in Europe since the Second World War. The body is headed by Moshe Garelick, a Chabad Rabbi from Milan. The executive director of the "Conference", Aba Dunner complained that the "center" was misrepresenting itself, deliberately confusing people and duplicating their work. Attacked their action as counter-productive he said:

What are non-Jewish government officials to think when one group has been dealing with them on the issue for years and then suddenly another group wants to negotiate with them on the same agenda? We believe in the old shtadlonus [intercession, lobbying] methods rather than in conferences with low-level diplomats which may provide headlines but accomplish nothing.

While the organisation was set up as a Chabad group, they removed all references to Chabad after a few months, the Chabad Headquarters in New York still listed it as a Chabad organisation. The sister organisation of the "Center", the "European Jewish Community Center" uses the initials EJCC again similar to the initials of the European Jewish Congress - a major organisation with representatives in over 40 states. Cobi Benatoff, president of the European Jewish Congress siad "We will certainly be confronting Chabad about this issue, this way of misleading people is not the Jewish way."

United States

Public menorahs

In 1989, the County of Allegheny with the support of Chabad defended itself in court all the way to the United States Supreme Court from the ACLU in County of Allegheny v. ACLU over the display of a public Menorah owned by Chabad.

The city of Burlington, Vermont denied the local Chabad chapter, headed by Rabbi Yitzchok Raskin permission to erect a Menorah in the city's main park during Chanukah. Raskin appealed the decision on two occasions after an initial hearing 1987 found the display to be unconstitutional under the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. The ACLU assisted the city of Burlington in a final appeal in the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in 1991, and the Menorah ban was upheld. A similar case occurred in Chicago in 1990, and the court found the same way, as did a court in Iowa in 1986. Another similar case in Cincinnati had the same judgement, as did a case in Georgia.

A similar case in White Plains led to the Common Council unanimously rejecting the display of a Menorah in a public space in the town with the support of many Jews, affirming a local tradition of keeping parks free of religious and political displays.

In 1988, the American Jewish Congress produced a 28-page report, entitled "The Year of the Menorah", criticising Chabad's Menorah campaign and the litigation that went with it. It complained of the increase in the number of menorahs placed on public lands, arguing that it was causing tension both within the community and with non-Jews.

IN 2002 U.S. Supreme Court last ruled that Chabad of Southern Ohio were entitled to light an 18-foot menorah in the city's Fountain Square. Justice John Paul Stevens ruled that the city could not ban the chanukiah and other religious displays from the square.

SeaTac Airport

In December 2006 a controversy emerged after Rabbi Elazar Bogomilsky complained that the SeaTac Airport was displaying a Christmas Tree but not a Menorah. In response to this complaint the airport management removed the tree, and Bogomilsky was widely criticised in the press for "having the tree removed". After considerable press and TV news coverage, the tree was replaced and Bogomilsky released the following statement:

"For many people, the Christmas tree is an important symbol of the season. Our goal was to include a menorah in the airport as well so that we could bring extra light with Hanukkah's universal message of hope."

Satmar-Chabad disturbances

On a number of occasions through the 1980s, Chabad and Satmar Hasidim became involved in violent brawls over various issues. In 1983 tensions were elevated and rioting ensued. Chabad spokesman Yehuda Krinsky blamed the Satmars, saying that the attacks were "definitely Satmar. Lubavitch is a victim of brutal attacks by Satmar. Their record of terrorism goes on." In a letter to Time magazine he repeated his allegations, arguing that it was false to claim that both groups were guilty.

Israel

Shalom Dov Wolpo

Shalom Dov Wolpo called for the state execution of the prime minister of Israel Ehud Olmert and a number of senior ministers at a gathering of senior Israeli rabbis in Tel Aviv. He argued that they should be "hanged from the gallows" for giving "these Nazis [Palestinian terrorists] weapons and money".

Menahem Mazuz opened an investigation into the comments. In comments to the Jerusalem Post, Meretz MK Haim Oron called on Defense Minister Ehud Barak to prevent the Chabad movement from providing religious services on IDF bases until it distances itself from Wolpe. Binyamin Netanyahu and Chabad spokesperson Menachem Brod also condemned the comments. Brod argued:

His irresponsible statements cause the utmost damage to the Greater Israel cause because he gives the mistaken impression that those who are opposed to territorial compromise and to the division of Jerusalem are a bunch of crazies.

His comments were also condemned by a number of religious MKs and by the Orthodox Union The row threatens to split the movement, with the messianists faction at risk of being distanced from the rest of the Chabad movement.

Wolpo has a long history of controversy in Chabad that in the past has resulted being chastised by the Rebbe in an unprecedented fashion. In Iyar 5744, 1984 the Rebbe told Rabbi Wolpo in reference to his repeated statements about Moshiach, "I am warning him to stop speaking, writing to spread or print anything about the ideas of Moshiach. In his name or in the name of others, or in whatever "kuntz" or style and way. And if G-d forbid he does something he should know clearly he is making a battle against me."

After bringing the Chabad Yeshiva to the edge of bankruptcy in Kiryat Gat he was removed as its director and replaced by Rabbi Havlin, now chief rabbi of Kiryat Gat and Rosh Yeshiva-Dean of the Chabad Yeshiva.

Chabad Youth Organisation

The death of the director of the Chabad Youth Organisation in Israel, the de facto hub of the vast majority of Chabad's activities in Israel, Rabbi Shlomo Madaintchek led to a power struggle between messianist and moderates over the control of the group. The messianists were led by Rabbi Yosef Yitzchak Wilshansky, the Rosh Yeshiva of the Chabad Yeshiva in Safed, while the moderates were led by Rabbi Yosef Aharonov. Wilshansky took Aharonov to court to prevent him making material changes CYO's foundation documents, signatory rights, directors, and membership, or making any other fundamental changes. The petitioners claim that this is an attempt to illegally take over the group and Chabad in Israel in general.

Control of 770 Eastern Parkway

The synagogue is currently being run by a team of Gabbaim who are elected by members of the Crown Height community every three years. For many years these people have been exclusively messianst and have set the tone for of the building. In 2005, following the plaque disturbance (see below), the Gabbaim, who had incorporated themselves as "Congregation Lubavitch Inc." went to court challenging the right of Agudas Chasidei Chabad and Merkos L'inyonei Chinuch to control the building and the synagogue. In 2006 ACC and MLC won the case over ownership of the building and served CLI with an eviction notice, and in December 2007 the New York Supreme Court upheld the eviction. CLI is expected to appeal this decision.

2004 disturbances

On December 15, 2004 a disturbance erupted in Crown Heights between anti-messianists and messianists that led to nine arrests after the official movement attempted to install a plaque, noting that Schneerson was dead. Gil Schwartz explained the reasoning of the messianists: "He's alive - they are writing that the rebbe is dead!" Another messianist, Meyer Romano, the next day said: "The Rebbe is Superman and [Rabbi] Yehuda Krinsky is Lex Luthor, you understand?"

2006 disturbances

Further disturbances following the Annual emissaries conference in November 2006 led to a number of injuries and damage to the property according to the senior emissary Dovid Eliezire as quoted in the Jewish Week. He wrote an article on the events that was published in Chabad periodicals and online.

2007 ruling

On December 27, 2007 Judge Ira Harkavy of the New York State Supreme Court ruled that the Gabbaim did not have the right to control the synagogue and gave the Chabad organisations that own the building the right to evict the Gabbaim. The Gabbaim expressed their intent to appeal, pending the transfer of a $500,000 bond and an undertaking to maintain the synagogue in the meantime. According to the Jewish Week, it remains unclear how the owners will exercise the rights the court has given them and some are predicting serious violence if any attempts are made to enforce the ruling. Edward Rudofsky, attorney for the community, warned of violence:

If people are provoked, I guess you can provoke anybody to the point where they don’t do what they should do and would do under normal circumstances. If they’re provoked enough I don’t want to speculate what will happen. I don’t want to sound like I’m condoning it, because I’m not.

Further reading

• On the Spectrum of Messianic Belief in Contemporary Lubavitch Chassidism, David Berger
• Chabad and Messianism, Adam Dickter, Hadassah Magazine and Hadassah's apology for printing it.
• The Once and Future Messiah in Early Christianity and Chabad, Joel Marcus
• Dalfin, Chaim. Attack on Lubavitch: A Response, Jewish Enrichment Press, February 2002 (ISBN 1-880880-66-0)
• Yanover, Yori. Attack on Chabad Is Called Unredeemable The Forward