mentalblog.com comments:
I'm always kind of amused by this line of thought. A man who considers his sole responsibility to be that of bringing the Jews closer to G-d and the final redemption and we're all dissapointed he didn't contribute to the arts and sciences.
Ironically, it took me a long time to come to grips with that as well. If the rebe was a Tzaddik, perfect in all ways, he surely would have proponed (is that a word?) such ideals.
But then a close friend educated me by way of example:
One wouldn't ask a distinguished artist such as, say, rembrandt, why he doesn't contribute to the literary canon. moreover, to the Rebbe, who's preocupation with bringing Utopia consumed him, such works would be secondary, akin to asking a distinguished transplant surgeon why he hasn't made any advances in the noble feild of dermatology.
still, it certainly shows the deep rooted respect that most people have for the Rebbe, that he is focus of their consternation over the scientific feilds as well as the religious.
DovBacchus, you are a moron.
Zalman Schacter-Shalomi gave up your proposed project himself, turning to "'New-Age" spiritualism, typified by his Spiritual Eldering Institute (www.spiritualeldering.org). All very nice--and with its own trademarked technique (From Aging to Sage-ing)--but also abandoning the derech you suggest.
Although he went to university over the objections of his father-in-law, he opposed secular higher education for his chassidim. So even if he would have developed a "chalk and whiteboard" mathematical / physical sciences approach to developing a unified theory of chassidus -- who from his flock would have understood him?
Binyomin, not talking about chicken and an egg here.
I feel this could be one of the more important posts on this blog. Will let it simmer.
PS Schneur, please tell about Friedmans.
If you learn some of Rav A.Y. Kook's essays, and read his letters- you'll find the person who did bring it all together.
> No, the Schneersohns chose science and not by coincidence.
And not just science. Sir Isaiah Berlin (philosophy) and Yehudi Menuhin (music) were cousins of the Rebbe.
B"H
The Rebbe's father-in-law was not against the Rebbe from going to university. The Rebbe was totally devoted to the Prev. Rebbe and wouldn't do anything against the former's desires.
The Rebbe went to university in the 20s and 30s. College life was different in those days. Students maintained a higher level of morality than now. It all changed in the 1960s and the reason the Rebbe discouraged Jews from going to university was to stay away from the loose sexuality and left wing (read: Anti-Semitic and anti-Israel) rhetoric that pervades that environment today. By the same token, many students who were attending university before they became frum, were advised by the Rebbe to remain there and complete their studies. However the Rebbe didn't want Jews starting down that path.
Yossel, where all the idiots come from? You are now banned like DovBacchus. Ryatz opposed Rebbe going to Berlin. You will have to read up on this and you will have to blame the Rebbe for creating the atmosphere of lies and fabrications that swept the crowd and your head.
see this:
http://www.mentalblog.com/2005/0...-and-
rebbe.html
The point of my original comment was clearly that some thought the Rebbe would be the person to show the continuim between Spirituality , Science philosophy etc. These was the way it was in the times of Chazal as indicated in the Talmud.
No where did I ask that the rebbe contribute to Art or culture.
Clearly many Lubavitchers do not understand what the meaning of spirituality is (of course fund raising and PR are included in the New spirituality too).
Speaking of the link TA posted above, I recall Schneur once mentioning an explanation by BG regarding why his father RSG gave the Rebbe his undivided support, and that come time he will write about this. Perhaps the time has indeed come?
... where do all the idiots come from? ... Ryatz opposed the Rebbe going to Berlin.
TA, I did not want to say anything, but since you ask: a blog that presents an assertion (not supported by any documents) by a very biased individual as an undisputed historical fact deserves the idiot / moron readership it seems to attract with the ever increasing frequency.
A more nuanced approach - like, "It is not clear that the Rebbe had the Previous Rebbe’s support in pursuing higher education. The Previous Rebbe's grandson (who was at odds with the Rebbe since 1950) reportedly asserted that the opposite was in fact true" - would probably yield a more nuanced and thoughtful conversation.
berl, crown heights, the master of "nuanced and thoughtful conversation" :+: :+: :+:
you are correct of course.
Commenting by HaloScan
