mentalblog.com comments:
Re the topic of "tzimtzum k'pshuto" in general -
the run-of-the-mill in Chabad see it as totally treif. -- However, truly, in "HaMelech B'Mesibo" (Sichos at the Yom Tov meals - Laufer, Kehot; At the end of one of the vols.) - the Rebbe indeed says there's an "ohrt" for an opinion such, but the Alter Rebbe didn't take it.
[There are other places in Chabad works which say so as well, which may be referred to there; but the sefer is not at my perusal at the moment.
*
The set is actually quite an interesting one, with discussion between the Rebbe and others (foremost, with the Rashag)- therefore giving an interesting perspective on the Rebbe's thoughts on varied issues of Nigleh and Nistar, seforim and sippurim.
It's available at:
http://store.kehotonline.com/
ind...itemsperpage=10 ].
The Rebbe stated several times at public farbrengens that tzimtzum kipshuto makes much more sense. As for the objections raised against it (spatiality re G-d etc.), the simple answer is "kol yachol" and "nimna hanimna'ot" etc. However, said the Rebbe, since the Alter Rebbe has a different view than that, "we follow him."
source?
At the moment I remember Shvuos 5743.
Thanks.
The Rambam writes at the begining of Hil. Deioth that one whose nature is slanted towards one extreme is considered to be ill. The remedy he proposes is to, for a time, throw oneself over to the very other extreme, that would be ordinarily no less repugnant. But in this particular case, this other extreme is beneficial, in that it will finally bring our protagonist to the golden middle.
Would it be a stretch that R. Nissan et al were just trying to put emotions, independent thought etc. "in their proper place", rather than eradicate them entirely? And that the fact that unfortunately this led to the other extreme being adopted is merely yenikas hachitzonim?
concerned, nice try.
Commenting by HaloScan
