mentalblog.com comments:
In a recent discussion with a Chabad friend, I asked if, when he said that Chasidim "love" the Rebbe, did he mean that they love the "celebrity" and what he stood for, the symbol, or do they love the person?
Nafka Mina:
If you just love the celebrity and the symbol, then the facts about Paris, the school, the Rebbe's brother are all not shiyach. They don't fit the symbol so they didn't happen. If you love the person, these facts are very relevant because they are part of the person's life. Imagine if a father passes away, what will his son do? Will he say that he is only interested in his father's teachings? Or will he look with awe and nostalgia warm and fuzzies when he sees the place where the father lived, where he worked, where he ate etc.?
I think that most Chasidim, including many who post on this site, loved the celebrity and symbol, rather than the Rebbe. When they say they loved him like a son loves a father (as Chasidim often recount with tears at a farbrengen), that was just a popular saying. They never knew the person, nor cared to know him. I do not mean this an some sort of "accusation". I am certainly not Chabad nor a Chasid. But I am fascinated with the Chabad Rebbe's life, and what experiences and relationships might have driven him to accomplish what he did. I would think a "son" would care even more so.
We recalled an incident, back in 1990, I think, where the Rebbe said that people should stop turning to him for all personal matters, that if they abided this request, they would have the Rebbe alive for longer. (Posters hear know better than I, no doubt.) Nonetheless, the requests kept rolling in and the terutzim kept coming. Did they love the Rebbe or did they so love the symbol of the Rebbe that they did not care as much about the person?
Excellent interview TA.
DELETED
not conducive to the conversation
Edited By Siteowner
rebel, there was nothing about a longer life for the Rebbe.
As far as dollars versus yechidus, you are limiting a Rebbe to being able to affect someone only in quality time. In fact, the dollars means the Rebbe became even more extrovert, because now all conversations on any matter were public and recorded, while in Yechidus they were private.
It boils down then to your feeling of dollars not being a personal time. AL Taam Vareiach Ein Lehitvakeiach, but truthfully as you yourself pointed out selfish feelings have no place in a Chossid.
Are we truly foolish enough to think that we ca relate to the Rebbe on a personal basis, that if the Rebbe would "only" have opened up more we would have felt closer to him? The words of Rabbi Yehudah Krinsky on the Rebbe should be immortalized: The closer one becomes to the Rebbe, the more you realize how much further he really is from you. Along this line is the assertion that Mesharsim and krovim cannot be Chassidim. You can take that gurberheit as perhaps Deitch and historians would that they know the "truth" about the Rebbe, or what I feel is the true meaning that they think they know the Rebbe personally and thereby lose all chance of becoming a Chossid.
guravitzer
You dodged the issue, quibbling with the words, though I seem to remember it that way. You guys probably learn it with haga'os so I will defer on the wording, but he did express the sentiment.
But you do make my point well, that you do not view the Rebbe a person, and in the process, you can not "love" him, in the traditional meaning of love. You must redefine it in a special meaning of love, tailor made for the Chabad Rebbe, just as many do with the word "death".
So I have to conclude that you concur, that what Chasidim love is the symbolism that the Rebbe stands for, not the Rebbe, the person, and therefore, what does not feed that symbolism does not interest you.
Not that there is anything wrong with that. I am simply trying to understand what Chasidim mean when they day that they "love" the Rebbe.
guravitzer, you need to look up what extroverted means. Because if you think that a person becomes extraverted by speaking into a microphone, than to use Berl's famous expression "you don't know your ass from your elbow".
At great risk of making an already silly discussion yet sillier, I will put my two cents in, at least in a general manner.
The definition of a Rebbe, is that he is a person of flesh and blood that exists in this world. For some being "up there", we have G-d; the whole point of the Tzaddik in Chassidus is "אנכי עומד בין ה' וביניכם", that indeed שכינה מדברת, but not in some bas kol that no-one hears, but rather מתוך גרונו, in a manner that can be heard in, and that is relevant to, this lowly physical world. That said, what is the point of a Rebbe totally removed from this world?
For this reason, it is imperative that there be (and I will yet argue that there is, Kotzker accusations notwithstanding) a Rebbe that lives the people, breathes the people, is the people. (בלשון החסידות: נשמה כללבת וכו ). Moreover, one that will provide precisely for the selfish needs of the people, at the very least the spiritual needs. If not that, then again; what is the point?
If so, then complaints about the Chassidim being selfish etc. lose much of their meaning. This - being there for the people - is part of the job description.
(BTW, about the personal-relationship/symbol-celebrity issue: As in every thing, the truth is in the middle. Despite the truth of rebeljew's point, most people do not care which toilet their father used. The reason is simple; people indeed want to have things through which they can relate personally, but those things must have some connection to the level of the relationship. Hence, if a Chassid's relationship to his Rebbe is exclusively a spiritual one, then the mundane biographical aspects are simply irrelevant).
Obviously, I am not trying to say that one should not feel bad about abusing the Rebbe's time (even in an extreme reading of "abusing"), nor that a normal Chassid ought not be interested in the Rebbe's background. Just that no approaches to the Rebbe, from either extreme, should be accepted as a given.
P.S. Which corresponds to the elbow, the introvert or the extravert?
"Chassid's relationship to his Rebbe is exclusively a spiritual one, then the mundane biographical aspects are simply irrelevant"
Let’s say the Rebbe starts wearing a kasket tomorrow and the day after everyone in 770 wears a kasket. Does this leave room for the “exclusively a spiritual”? My point is that “exclusively a spiritual” is not a Chabad model and doesn’t exist, perhaps only for the youngsters who never seen the Rebbe, but this is an unhealthy condition and is beyond our conversation.
Anyway I don’t care about the theories, this is about MY relationship with the Rebbe. My expectations and my disappointments. End of story.
TA, you seem to have missed the final paragraph of my comment. I never said that it "is a spiritual one", nor do I think that it should be. I just meant to bring out an extreme example of not every mundane thing being relevant. Though I think that guravitzer took his point much too far, it is essentially correct. I would say that you agree as well: we look at new data about the Rebbe not with the interest of some collector of stamps, coins, or information, but because we believe that this information will give us a better understanding of who the Rebbe is. Because - and here you and rebeljew are right on the mark - the Rebbe is not simply a figurehead, but someone who according to Chassidus is עומד בין ה' וביניכם, therefore any mundane detail, let alone tough moral issues like this one, ought to give us some teaching. In the words of the Talmud (Berachot 62a), תורה היא וללמוד אני צריך.
About your personal disappointments about your relationship or lack thereof with the Rebbe, it is truly difficult to comment. As we read today: מה אעידך, מה אדמה לך...
"tough moral issues like this one" - sorry, I confused this thread with other current ones.
770 bachur
It is not about which toilet he used as you put it. It is about what life experiences and relationships helped to form his outlook. If one cares anything about a PERSON, that is what they care about. If the answer is that he is not a "PERSON" but some other type of (higher) creature, then "love" must be redefined.
The rest of your comments are good food for thought.
What is the purpose of this blog? To take Chabad apart, or to keep it alive by criticising some of the honest problems which do exist in the movement? If the former, yeshakeini - you do not even come up to the ankles of the lousiest shaliach out there. We already have one Shmarya to laugh at - and I know him and can confirm that he is non compos mentis. You, on the other hand, are intelligent and sane and should not be using your talents to destroy what others have built.
If the latter - why debunk the Rebbe? Sure, we know that the PR machine exaggerated some things - so what - they are just human beings and these things happen. Concentrate on real problems such as confused kids going off the derech, nepotism, head shluchim getting old and not making way for the new generation, overreliance on political ties and PR in the FSU, nutty fringe meshichisten having too much of a voice etc etc.
ani lo mevin, this blog has no purpose B"H. And why that is you all feel compelled to put me down and tell me on how I measure "with ankles of the lousiest shaliach"? This is Chutzpa from person who does know me.
By the way did anyone see Rabbi Feller? Because if he gets me annoyed I will start writing about his employer, who IMHO falls into the former category
:( the DAL.
Tzemach, we all know (well, most of us) that your issues are of a personal nature. I'm glad to see that they haven't consumed your life. Although perhaps blogging about them has...
I have a feeling you wanted a friend in the Rebbe on some level. No clue why you would think that possible, but to each their own.
If you don't consider someone who talks to people in public for 6 hours straight an extrovert, you'll have to publish your own dictionary.
"Tzemach, we all know (well, most of us) that your issues are of a personal nature. "
This might be true in the sense that these issues affected him personally, but not in the sense that they were unique to him. I have never met Tzemach in real life, yet can empathize with much of what he writes.
Yossi, you misunderstand completely. Tzemach is not an intellectual analyst of Chabad's problems, nor a rabid Chabad hater, nor a cynical spectator. He couldn't really care less if the Tzimtzim left a Reshimah or not. Nor if Yechi is apikorsus or not. He cares about the fact that his feelings were hurt. We can all empathize with that, we have all had our feelings hurt at some point (well, maybe not Scott). And he is digging in an attempt to find the cause of his hurt, to blame it on an institutionalized attitude. I think he just had funny expectations, but it's his feelings, not mine.
guravitzer, you are way off base. I don't have time to type now but your assertions are incorrect. This is not only about me feelings. This is about the movement and the ideology that let the Jewish people down. This was a fiasco as was Jewish infatuation with socialism lehavdil. So I do approach this in general terms. Having said that, your response to the Chana Gourary post causes me to lose an interest in any kind of exchange with you. I am ashamed for a fellow Druer.
TA--this comment is probably similarly objectionable to guravitzer as your above post, but here goes: my thought is that if the Rebbe "distributed his attributes"--his "extroversion" as well as his "pnimiot" in order to create a tension--Mosiach consciousness heightened even as he counsels the shalichiim to operate deeper in "enemy territory"--then there is no "fiasco" here. There is a challenge, or a difficulty, or a Zen koan or an opportunity. By intention.
By the way did anyone see Rabbi Feller? Because if he gets me annoyed I will start writing about his employer, who IMHO falls into the former category
_____________________________________
What is the above supposed to mean? Where does Rabbi Feller, whom I do not know at all, come into anything except that he spent time being mekarev a sad individual who turned on Lubavitch?
DELETED
this poster is not welcomed on this blog
ALM
I think Tzemach suspects more than he lets on. I must admit, it crossed my mind as well.
But SR's core issue is not radically different than anyone else's. SR was a Lubavitcher BT who became disenchanted with what he saw as a radically immoral stance by a person or people holding themselves to be paragons of morality. This is how he spells it out on his site.
Add this to the infallibility doctrine and the Rebbe's sharp response to him, not to mention the handling of that response by makirim, and it leaves him no place to go but out the door. Being the activist that he is, did you expect him to just lick his wounds, and say "I've been beat" and walk away. BTs tend to view their commitment to Yiddishkeit as a personal sacrifice, and in most cases, it is with the loss of communal base, often with loss of family emotional and moral support, and radical change of lifestyle to an unfamiliar playing field. I think SR feels betrayed, and he allows it to consume a large place in his life, precisely because the Chabad vision and Yiddishkeit WERE so important to him. That deeply amplifies the feeling of betrayal, and I am sure he would not want others to find the same painful reality wake up call that he did, when he realized that he did not fit in and was "told off".
I don't expect that you will understand that ALM, but there those here that will.
As to love, which began this line of posts - does one allow his loved one to be shamed? Do you think the rebbe is basking in Gan Eden for having been turned into an Avodah Zara? Don't you think that if you truly loved the Rebbe you would not bring his actions into the Highest Court in an accusation that it brought about wide-spread apikorsus and avodah zara? Doubt me...look further into the posts and see Paul Freidman, bringing Zen moments into Chabad. As far from truth Lubavitch now is, as it once was close to truth.
As for introvert vs. extrovert - I speak all the time. Yet no one knows me. Does that make me introverted or extroverted? Speaking into the mike, as TA correctly said, would not make anyone an extrovert. Sharing one's insides might. Having personal relationships with a large swathe of people might. Just lecturing them, nope, won't work as a definition of extroverted.
And last but not least, for those who would tear at TA because of his message, whatever his motive does not have any impact on whether or not what he voices is true. You know, I find it fascinating that Eliyahu Hanavi was called "Oker Yisrael" for voicing the truth.
An introvert can speak into a mike endlessly without stagefright. He is not concerned with what the listener might think, because he is not interested in any further interaction. Lecturing in a disconnected manner to a large audience, and an "all business" attitude, are typical of an introverted personality.
BTW, about the chassidim pestering the Rebbe; there is a mashpia in Israel, one of the more interesting ones, who often expresses a similar sentiment. (בלשונו: "אתם לא צריכים רבי, מעניין אתכם דולרים). In fact, it is related that he once ordered bochrim not to pass by the Rebbe for dollars, so as not to waste his time. When this became known, the Rebbe called him a חסיד שוטה...
DELETED
jo jo is an idiot his posts will be deleted
Edited By Siteowner
770 bachur
We are not talking about dollars, a 2 second interaction, we are talking about people giving vast descriptions of every life problem to the Rebbe and not moving until they get an answer. The Rebbe specifically asked them to stop, and that the Rebbe would live longer if people complied. I remember it, and I remember the Chabadniks debating what it meant at the time. Some took it as a CR prophecy that he was about to fall ill or incapacitated.
rebeljew,
I was just giving an extreme example; by respectable Chassidim, there were many cases of disputes, problems etc. that people would be sorely tempted to write in to the Rebbe about, such writing which would have helped resolve many problems, and did not do so in order not to cause the Rebbe עגמת נפש. And I am speaking about people with names.
About people not moving until they get the Rebbe's answer - a cursory reading of Igros and other collections of the Rebbe's responsa readily show his attitude on this. As well as his "inaugural" address.
770 bachur
This was something that occurred around 1987 or 1988. I cannot remember when exactly. it was considered a groundbreaking radical change from the way things had been.
But SR's core issue is not radically different than anyone else's. SR was a Lubavitcher BT who became disenchanted with what he saw as a radically immoral stance by a person or people holding themselves to be paragons of morality. This is how he spells it out on his site.
Add this to the infallibility doctrine and the Rebbe's sharp response to him, not to mention the handling of that response by makirim, and it leaves him no place to go but out the door. Being the activist that he is, did you expect him to just lick his wounds
_____________________________________
Look, I have met SR quite a few times in Yerushalayim on a couple of visits there. NO, I am not from his hometown - I am in Europe somewhere and am originally from NYC. He is NOT an activist - he is a wannabe, a failure who blames everyone for his shortcomings. I would not call him meshugge; just a loser. His blog is pure loshon hora and motzi shem ra.
Ani Lo Mevin, please leve this blog, you are an idiot.
ALM
You need to refresh yourself on some definitions.
http://rebeljew.blogspot.com/
200...dictionary.html
Better do it quickly. You know what quickly happens when you are declared an idiot around here.
DELETED
idiotic
Edited By Siteowner
The "prolificacy" not to mention the "colorfulness" and erudition showed by the Mesholim in the above post causes me, for one, to break into something other than a nervous sweat...
The comment wasn't meant to be understood as if you haven't experienced it you won't understand it. It was meant to illustrate how dynamic the Rebbe was. Lehavdil when Jews got all caught up in the excitement of the Avoda Zara in the time of the Tanach and the Talmudists (and ourselves) don't understand it. Tzemach - you have a short fuse and a big delete key!!!
:)
Let's see if you allow some discussion on various levels - or maybe just Bully out all of us idiots!
We still love your blog more than you can imagine....
Commenting by HaloScan
