Photo from YU
Schneur commenting on Not Brisk turning it up a notch:
Bimechilas kevodo of the Rav; he had a Romantic and nostalgic view of Chassidus in Poland. Things were not as feigeldik as he decribes it. But the Rav was a darshan a master of homiletic, and as any good darshan and magid, you create an atmosphere imagined or real to prove your point. In Nefesh Horav, Rav Hershel Schacter has the Rav saying that good part of his droshes are theatrics, and of course thats true. See "Boston Boy" by Hentoff for a most interesting portrayal of the Rav as a preacher. Thousands of Chassidic young people were leaving the fold every year to become secular Jews, Zionists, Communists etc. The big Chassidic groups were not particularly spiritual, that's why Rebbes like the Piasecner, Reb Shimmele Zelichover, the Levertever, the Koznitzer and Chabad were gaining followers from the young people. Even those who stayed Chassidic joined groups like Zeirei Aguda and Poalei Aguda where politics was more important than other activities. See Mendel Piekasz's fine study of this subject in Hebrew, where he studies the state of Chassidus in Poland between the wars in depth. Rabbi Simon Huberband alludes to these issues in his book about religious life in the warsaw Ghetto.
Many Chassidim were not particularly learned either. That's another myth; as if the water carrier in Warsaw knew shas and the Vilner water carrier was a lamdan. Nonsense. Punkt farkert! until after the War you could be a good Orthodox Jew and not have anything beyond a cheder education. Today 99% of chassidim have attended yeshiva gedola and Kollel. Of course the pockets of chassiduth that did exist, were much more powerful than what passes as chassidus today. As I mentioned, you had spiritual Rebbes in Poland who were slowly rebuilding chassidus, like the Piasetzner and Levertever . You also had chavrayas studying Chabad, a network of shtieblech adhering to the teachings of Rav Kuk, and men like Reb Hillel Zeitlin HaY"d. But in general today's chassidim are much more learned in Gefes, if not in darchei hachassidus, And I presume the Rebbes of yore were more serious people. But let's not mince words, the Rav was wrong - Chassidus and chassidim have reconstituted themselves in the USA.
Let me add a controversial idea , I believe the last Lubavitcher Rebbe agreed with the Rav on this , and that's why he changed Chabad from a movement that stressed Avoda and "Haskolah" to a movement stressing pragmatic action. When the Hungarian and Galitzianer Chassidim started coming for dollars, I am convinced the Rebbe was a bit amazed that chassidus had grown in America with the classic levush, Yiddish, and the whole 9 yards, a lot of which had been left on the wayside by Chabad in America. Sure he saw some Chagas people in CH in the early 1960's but there was a tremendous shvachkayt there, Bobov in 1960 was not Bobov in 1980. But these groups were huge and more Chassidic by the 1970's and no longer in CH. I am sure the Rebbe would have been amazed to see life in BP in 1989.
Bemechilas kevodo of the Rav he had a Romantic and nostalgic view of Chassidus in Poland. Things were not as feigeldik as he decribes it. But the Rav was a darshan a master of homiletics, and as any good darshan and magid, you create an atmosphere imagined or real to prove your point.In Nefesh Horav , Rav Hershel Schacter has the rav saying that good part of his droshes are theatrics, and of course thats true.See Boston Boy by Hentoff for a most interesting portrayal of the rav as a preacher.
ReplyDeleteThousands of Chassidic young people were leaving the fold every year to become secular jews Zionists, Communists etc.
The big Chassidic groups were not particularly spiritual thats why rebbes like the Piazecner, Reb Shimmele Zelichover, the Levertever, the Koznitzer and Chabad were gaining followers from the young people. Even those who stayed Chassidic joined groups like Zeire Aguda and Poale Aguda where politics was more important than other activities.See Mendel Piekasz's fine study of this subject in Hebrew where he srudies the state of Chassidus in Poland between the wars in depth. abbi Simon Huberband alludes to these issues in his book about religious life in the warsaw Ghetto.
Many Chassidm were not particularly learned either. Thats another myth as if the water carrier in Warsaw knew shaas and the Vilner water carrier was a lamdan. Nonsense.Punkt farkert until after the War you could be a good Orthodox Jew and not have anything beyond a cheder education. Today 99% of chassidim have atended yeshiva gedola and Kollel.
Of course the pockets of chassiduth that did exist, were much more powerful than what passes as chasidus today. As I mentioned you had spiritual rebbes in Poland who were slowly rebuilding chasisdus, like the piasetzner and Levertever . You also had chavrayas studying Chabad a network of shtiblech adhering to the teaching of Rav Kuk. and men like Reb Hillel Zeitlin Hayad. But in general todays chassidim are much more learned in Gefes, if not in darche hachassidus
And I presume the rebbes of Yore were more serious people.
But lets not mince words the rav was wrong -Chassidus and chassidim have reconstituted themselves in the USA.
Let me add a controversial idea , I believe the last Lubavitcher rebbe agreed with the Rav on this , and thats why he changed Chabad from a movement that stressed Avoda and "Haskolah" to a movement stressing pragmatic action. When the Hungarian and galitzianer chassidim started coming for dollars , I am convinced the Rebbe was a bit amazed that chasidus had grown in America with the classic levush, Yiddish, the whole 9 yards, a lot of which had been left on the wayside by Chabad in America.Sure he saw some Chagas people in CH in the early 1960's but there was a tremendous shvachkayt there, Bobov in 1960 was not Bobov in 1980.But these groups were huge and more Chassidic by the 1970's and no longer in CH. I am sure the rebbe would have been amazed to see life in BP in 1989.
so what you're saying, Reb Schneur, at least as far droshes being theatrics, that the Rav was no different than a Rebbe waving his hands and "chapping Malochim..."
ReplyDeleteHow can you doubt that the Rebbe, through either tremendous pikchus or outright ruakh HaQodesh, would fail to prognosticate thses sociological advances before they actually occurred?
ReplyDeleteTzig, Why no mention concerning the death of Judge Sifton several days ago. After all he was a fairly important figure in recent Chabad history.
ReplyDeleteI found it unusual that the NY Times in its obituary failed to mention the Gourary case
But lets not mince words the rav was wrong -Chassidus and chassidim have reconstituted themselves in the USA.
ReplyDeleteperhaps you're both right and what we have here is a semantical quibble.
The Rav was such a snag that he was not only dismissive of Chasidim but of any who weren;t of his generation/brand of Chasidim.
To him Chasidus was not just about levush. Maybe he saw the Chasidivc landscape in America and saw in it Judasim reduced to color-war, with overgrown campers wearing the team colors and mistaking rooting for the team captain with hiskashrus to a Tzadik, mistaking staring for many long hours at the team captain with learning darkei avodah and mistaking particpating in the Grand Sing with acheiving dveykus.
IIRC the Satmar Rebbe zy"a arguably the one most responsible for the reconstitution, also said that he wanted to build a kehilla not a chasidus and that nishtakakh Toras HaBa'al Shem.
So as far as the Rav was concerend only ersatz chasidus has made it to America.
Why no mention concerning the death of Judge Sifton several days ago?
ReplyDeleteI saw it, but wasn't ready to rehash the whole story again. As far as the NYT; I think they see Bloomy's third term ruling as far more important...
schneur
ReplyDeleteAchrie Mechilas Kevoid ToroischoThe ravs attachment to chassidus was not only hollow and brimstone, he had a profund awe and understanding in Chabad Chassidus there are beautiful biurim on that matter, their was a while in Boston that he gave lectures on Likuttie Torah.
Anonymous :
ReplyDeleteActually you prove my point. Of course the rav understood Chabad chassidus as it was practiced by a few serious people in Chaslevitz etc. By now thats a davar yadua.But you know there was more to Chabad than studying Tanya, these was avoda, minhogim ,hiskashrus and a particular world view. I question if the rav understood this, only someone growing up in a Chabad sviva picks this up. And then in the new book with transcripts of tapes of the rav he criticizes contemporary Chabad, because they did not meet his Roamticized definition of Chabad.Chasiduth can be pniumius and it can just as well be defined through chitzonius.In reality they are both legitimate.
My point that chassidus was resurrected in America. take a look at all the yarchonim put out by chassidic groups and the articles , notes letters by young people , how much they know about minhogim , dynasties, yichus, seforim . Its amazing. This includes Chabad, everyone.Now only if they got proper leadership.. hot men kekent iberkern a velt !
Tzig, did you mean to say "veritable" masterpiece, rather than "venerable" masterpiece?
ReplyDeleteSchneur,
ReplyDeleteYour theory that the Rebbe started learning the Careidi world when he saw them coming to Dollars is sheer nonsense, the dollar distribution started years after the Mendel Vechter episode, the story came to closure already by then, and the Rebbe was involved on a daily basis with Vechter and tens of families that resided in the belly of the beast Diskarye Williamsburgh,he got reports that were thick as webster dictionaries on the situation. You starting to seem almost like the professor you praise so highly, Mendel Fiekarz which 90% of his book included the holocaust story of the Rebetzin that is accusing Belzer Rov. His book is all nonsense that Gerer Rebbe had thousands of Chassidim that were not frum because the Soklover Rebb said that Gerer Rebbe has 1000's of chasidim that don't wear Tefilin, the Sokolover meant the total opposite that Ger has thousands of non bar mitzvah kids,
Schneur - yaser keyach for your illuminating words.
ReplyDeleteCan you elaborate on "a network of shtieblech adhering to the teachings of Rav Kuk" in Paylin far di milchomo? Do you just mean Mizrachi minyonim or more? A dank fareys.
HT: you bidavkah used the same photo twice for a post from Shneir?
ReplyDeleteSchneurs theory on the Rebbes understanding Chariedim is ridiculous. Wasn't Reb Mendel Vechter emerging from Willi years earlier then the Sunday dollars giving? it was almost a decade long the Vechter episode, and the Rebbe was briefed daily, just 1 example of how his analysis is nonsense.
ReplyDeleteSchneur
ReplyDeleteReb Shimele Zelichover was famous as the Ilu and Oived Hashem, but no following what so ever, many people knew him from Yachal, he himself considered himself a Chosid from the Levertover
Schneur,
ReplyDeleteYou are likely misrepresenting the Rav. He was first and foremost a Gaon. Next, an incredible darshan. This is born out in his own comments about Chabad not having enough "real chassidim" who can properly teach chassidus these days.
Suggest you read his comments in "thinking out loud" regarding that point.
Schneur,
ReplyDeleteYou seem more broad minded than typical Lubavitchers, yet you call non-chabad chassidim, chagas. They don't consider themselves chagas and don't even know what it means. It is only in the self-centered view of Lubavitch that all non-chabad chassidim are lumped together in the second rate 'chagas' catagory
An Almiesher
ReplyDeleteLet these chasidim not be so ignorant and they should know that Chagas is no insult, its a different view in Chassidus that they claimed for themselves VS. chabad in the early years.Its not Shneurs fault that 90 % of chassidim dont even know whats its all about, the most they know about chassidus, is the price of a Poly Kemoi Ziedener Bekiche at G&G
Yes, Schneur, can you explain what you mean by "a network of shtieblech adhering to the teachings of Rav Kuk". Did Rav Kook have talmidim (chassidim?) organized in Poland?
ReplyDeleteFriendly Anonymous said...
ReplyDeleteTzig, did you mean to say "veritable" masterpiece, rather than "venerable" masterpiece?
I meant venerable. look it up.