Yeshayahu Leibovitch posed his famous question:
Notice the picture of Isaiah Berlin there. And the closely related dilemma.
Whatever the motivation or a condition, the bottom line is that after all the tzores in the last century we got ourselves a person who captured and continues to capture the imagination of many, who modeled himself after the twin villains from Moscow and Berlin. In the spiritual sense the abused is compelled to perpetuate the crime. And it is only our luck that the apparatchiks don’t have the real power or for sure they would build a secret police, inquisition, the works. Does anyone have any doubt that Benzi Shemtov or his numerous ilk, given the power, would put the worst KGB tortures to shame? And the other sign of powerlessness is that these commissars can’t do no good, but they can still do the damage. Yeshayahu Leibovitch on somewhat related subject.
Let me explain the last Leibovitch’s clip. When Yeshayahu Leibovitch defines a religion he understands that by definition its functions in the opposition to power. Karl Marx’s vision of socialism was in fact a pure opposition to power. If a religion is colluding with power or uses nationalism as a metaphor for the God given power, than it morphs into nazional socialism, Nazism for short, or the original Soviet version. For whatever reason Mendel Schneerson decided to go into this market. And today his emissaries worship exclusively power and money (that’s why they like to be photographed with the political leaders and the oligarchs). In addition they don’t preach the religion but they traffic in the jewish nostalgia, an identity variant of the Jewish nationalism. As far Yeshayahu Leibovitch is concerned this is no longer a religion. But it also illustrates why Mendel Schneerson had to imitate both totalitarian leaders who were the purest expression of this craft available to him during his formative years. In fact the 20th century was about the redefining of religions as nationalism. This form of nationalism swept even the muslim world, including all major Arab powers besides the oil kingdom, Saddam Hussein in Iraq, Abdel Nasser in Egypt, Hafez al-Assad in Syria were all part of the creed.
{ 10 comments… read them below or add one }
Incoherence is power.
Hello, Guravitzer. How is Uruguay?
I know it’s Halloween today, but I didn’t expect the ghosts to come out so early.
Your smarts are undeniable, to understand the reason and season for a ghost’s reappearance.
Based on below by Schneur, proper title of post should be Incoherence Rising.
Perhaps Leibowitz meant that every Jew is false. Delete the Messiah.
Or Incoherence Now, with the choppers playing Shamil as the napalm lands.
Until next yontif.
Leibowitz wrote somewhere that by definition every Jewish Messiah is a false messiah and there is some truth in this . If the Messiah were real we would not be discussing it.
I do not think the rebbe was either one of the 2 characters you mention.
He was a great jJewish communal leader , perhaps the greatest of the second part of the past century.
I see little real spiritual teaching coming from the Rebbe. Indeed he gave Chassidic discourses, hadranim on the talmud even wrote some responsa, but I have failed to note any well planned systematic theological statement. He certainly does not compare with R. Soloveitchik in thought and depth.
Some of his followers have written English books about his teachings , but any one on the inside knows these books are nonsense intended either to make a tidy profit or to give the Rebbe publicity in the secular community.
Compare the Rebbe as a spiritual leader to men like rav Nachman, Rabbi Ashlag , Rav Abraham Kuk, Hillel Zeitlin, Rabbi Aaron Roth the Izbicer rebbe, Rav Zadok of Lublin and others.
The rebbe said and wrote little that anyone can recall or that is noteworthy and one of a kind. All that does not diminish his stature as a talmid chacham , but I question his status as an original thinker.
He was a religious engineer, developing programs (Messiah campaign, Chabad houses , Tzivos hashme etc etc) and as long as he could kept a tight control over his troops(I guess until the late 1970;s) but his spiritual message ?
His followers and people around him were mostly a combination of PR creatures, middle level managers(as Barry Gourary called them) opportunists , enforcers and people trying to Tl the rebbe to get “brownie points” fromt eh Rebbe.
I have wondered aloud many times why the Rebbe a college educated sophisticate surrounded himself with a bunch like he did.(of course i would have like dto serve him too)
Yes the Rebbe modeled his style but not content on the great dictators of Europe, although no one has tried to study if the Rebbe actually copied his style fromt that great Jewish leader Zev Jabotinsky who was very popular in Russia etc.
Schneur, I would leave the odd comparison to Jabotinsky to some other time. But I recently heard a lot about Hillel Tzeitlin. I very much would like to know him and his heroic life.
Schneur, could the Rebbe’s deference to his father-in-law, almost at times seeming to “channel” him, be the reason why you believe his contribution was not as unique or distinctive as the others you cite, such as Reb Areleh?
Binyomin.
Aderabba what was the original and seminal contribution of the Rebbe to Jewish mysticism and scholarship ?
The Rebbe’s father in law was a great Communal leader of World Jewry in 4 different countries and inspired Jews in the USSR, but certainly was not a great teacher of Jewish mysticism.
As I wrote the Rebbe’s mind worked as an engineer a planner and problem solver not a theoretical thinker. He saw a problem (Jews assimilating) and devised solutions. He had a desired goal bringing Messiah and developed a plan to realize this goal.
Great mystics reveal their inner selfs to their readers we know much about the inner emotional turmoil in Rav Nachman , in Reb Arele, in Rav Kuk in the Rav (Reb Yoshe Ber ) we hear their cries, their pain ,their hopes and their dreams. But except for a few childhood stories the Rebbe did not reveal himself in his talks , letters or speeches, In fact these were rather detached and if I may say cold. We know little how the rebbe felt and is emotional turmoil. Characteristics of an engineer and planner. I think thats the reason that unlike the others I mentioned who have followers in different strata of Jewish society(except for rav Arele) the Rebbe’s teaching are basically studied only by his followers the Chabad community.
Schnuer, but what about the early years when the Rebbe was prone to bursting into tears during farbrengens and showing what appeared to be great emotion. Was there a qualitative difference in the Rebbe’s deportment and approach in the early years which changed over time — and if so, what do you think caused that to happen?
I heard that the Rebbe did indeed cry in the early years. But from the tremendous amount of writing and speeches from the Rebbe we know so little about his inner life. I think thats one reason that writing a biogrpahy of him is so difficult. A greta deal of his biography is cmpletely speculative. And I am not saying there is anything wrong with this .
On the other hand we can cull more than a bit about the rav from his drashoth. The same is true about the masses of material now coming out from Rav A. Kuk.
But the point I was trying to make is that the Rebbe in my opinion did not create any original or innovative philosophy. His acheivements were in the realm of “maase” . And thats 1 reason I consider the Rebbe the greatest Jewish leader outside of Israel in the second half of the past century.
I know little about Jabotisnky , and Betar but I would urge soemone out there to look into any connections with the Rebbe’s outlook.Check out Jabotinsky darsheing in Yiddish on youtube. wonderful !