Talk:Tzadik/Archive 1

POV violation

 * "...it was later used to shock those who have no exposure to these sources."

I'm afraid that this is quite POV (not to mention highly factually disputed). Revisions upcoming (hopefully)... HKT talk 03:08, 19 August 2005 (UTC)


 * How is this POV? --PinchasC | £€åV€ m€ å m€§§åg€  03:16, 19 August 2005 (UTC)
 * The part of the other views regarding this is discussed in the chabad article. --PinchasC | £€åV€ m€ å m€§§åg€  03:17, 19 August 2005 (UTC)

No other views are discussed anywhere. You cite a bunch of "proof-texts" that don't show what you claim they do, and then you write that people who don't think that "the Rebbe and God are one" are simply ignorant of the sources. The POV is quite blatant. P.S. The last source that you quoted did generate shockwaves quite quickly in some circles. HKT talk 17:02, 19 August 2005 (UTC)


 * When you mentioned other views, I though you were speaking about other views to the other extreme (i.e. that a Tzaddik is God). As I started off the paragraph, this is based upon Kabbalah, if there are people that don't accept Kabbalah and view the soul not as part of God, this wouldn't be. As I stated above if there is anothe POV, which I left out, feel free to add it, (that is what wikipedia is all about.) --PinchasC | £€åV€ m€ å m€§§åg€  10:06, 20 August 2005 (UTC)

I reread that section of the article, and I think that I now better understand what you were trying to get across. Apparently, you were trying to present the Likutei Sichos remark as similar to other comments from classic sources. You seem to be trying to suggest that "the Rebbe and God are one" is metaphor. Unfortunately, that requires your interpretation and, as such, would be considered original research. HKT talk 07:00, 21 August 2005 (UTC)
 * It was originally referenced in the chabad article and I will reference it again to two different books. I forgot to include the references. --PinchasC | £€åV€ m€ å m€§§åg€  07:41, 21 August 2005 (UTC)