Origins Of Chassidus (The Good the Bad and the Ugly) And Is there A bad Jew?

[aygart]

Chassidus was in full swing. If the cherem was purely preventative, it should have said so. It wasn't. It was about what was happening already. If it was at all effective in "taming" chassidus, you should be able to point to at least one teeny tiny little change, even if the changes were mostly preventative.

You make as if we have no idea how those lines would have diverged. We have an idea, the ideologies spelled out their vision for those lines.

We now have two hundred years of history to see how it played out. You're going to have to do better than the *possibility* of preventive effects.

*this was written prior to your edit

Their vision may be different than how it is or even was practiced. Is chassidus practiced now exactly the way it was at the time? Is there more less or the same amount of jumping around and dancing during davening? Is there more leass or the same focus on limud hatorah?

Also partially addressed by my edit.

[aygart]

Ahem...

There are different ways of attaching to a Rebbe. I wonder how the Gr"a would feel about how some in the Yeshivish world relate to Gedolim.

I don't wonder. He would certainly disapprove.

Changes of the siddur - do you daven from סידור הגר"א or from נוסח אשכנז. Are you familiar with the changes between the two. See the link to Mondshine's research for a listing of changes that the Gr"a made, that even his talmidim don't follow.

I daven from a sfard siddur

Shchita knives? CMIIAW, but I believe EVERYONE uses סכינים מלוטשים nowadays.

Rav Belsky said many times that the difference is currently irrelelvant with todays metals, but either way I think it had less to do with the actual knife than with the change from tradition.

[ExGingi]

Either way I recommend that you research the Gaon's reasoning from sources other than Chabad.

Which I most definitely did, and continue to attempt. As evidenced by:

Only thing I found is http://jewishhistory.huji.ac.il/kuntress/Chassidiana/chassidiana6_28.pdf which quotes it on page 10 (page 5 of the PDF).

All being said, we might eventually agree or disagree about history. The question is (and was in the title I proposed to the moderators) whether it has any relevance today, or is any opposition to Chassidus or Chassidim just thinly veiled שנאת חנם?

[aygart]

The question is (and was in the title I proposed to the moderators) whether it has any relevance today, or is any opposition to Chassidus or Chassidim just thinly veiled שנאת חנם?

I don't think it has relevance in most of current chassidus other than some of the ideological aspects of it such as the discussions regarding tzimtzum and the relations with a rebbe. It does possibly still apply to parts of Breslov and maybe the more extreme parts of Lubavitch from how I have heard some groups being described but don't know if they actually exist. I am not sure what specific opposition you are referring to.

[jye]

Mekor Boruch quoting the Tzemach Tzedek that the Gra saved chassidus

[Boruch999]

Mekor Boruch quoting the Tzemach Tzedek that the Gra saved chassidus

aygart והוא הדבר אשר דיבר

[ExGingi]

Mekor Boruch quoting the Tzemach Tzedek that the Gra saved chassidus

http://www.shturem.net/index.php?section=artdays&id=785

Highly recommended read (which also mentions the rift among Chassidic leaders relating to reliance on the Tzadik): http://w3.chabad.org/media/pdf/899/FygM8993103.pdf

[zh cohen]

Mekor Boruch quoting the Tzemach Tzedek that the Gra saved chassidus

In case you don't want to read the entire article @ExGingi posted, here is a key quote;

ששמועה זו מוכחשת בעליל, שהרי את ה'שולחן ערוך' החל אדמו"ר הזקן לחבר במזריטש – בפקודת הרב המגיד – עוד בטרם פרצה המחלוקת מווילנא ואגפיה!

[Boruch999]

http://www.shturem.net/index.php?section=artdays&id=785

Is there no other source for the quote from the Tzemach Tzedek?

[jye]

According to the source quoted above Rav Wolbe brings down the same but his source is probably the Mekor Boruch as well....

[aygart]

http://www.shturem.net/index.php?section=artdays&id=785

Highly recommended read (which also mentions the rift among Chassidic leaders relating to reliance on the Tzadik): http://w3.chabad.org/media/pdf/899/FygM8993103.pdf

THis "source" to question the mekor baruch is not credible at all. It is very clear from the way this article begins immediately with ad hominem attacks on the Torah Temima and Aruch Hashulchan that he decided that the story could not have occurred and then found the "facts" to back it up. Whether or not the line quoted by zh cohen is factually true or not. it still does not disprove the story. It may have been based on pushback prior to the actual cherem and even if it means the actual cherem and it was started before the cherem could have been a major impetus to complete it quickly or the like.

I am quite disappointed that you are quoting such articles at all. If someone would have quoted an article saying similar things about the various Rebbes you would correctly take exception to it. It is equally correct to take exception to your posting such trash.

[zh cohen]

THis "source" to question the mekor baruch is not credible at all. It is very clear from the way this article begins immediately with ad hominem attacks on the Torah Temima and Aruch Hashulchan that he decided that the story could not have occurred and then found the "facts" to back it up. Whether or not the line quoted by zh cohen is factually true or not. it still does not disprove the story. It may have been based on pushback prior to the actual cherem and even if it means the actual cherem and it was started before the cherem could have been a major impetus to complete it quickly or the like.

I am quite disappointed that you are quoting such articles at all. If someone would have quoted an article saying similar things about the various Rebbes you would correctly take exception to it. It is equally correct to take exception to your posting such trash.

Have you ever read anything else that Mondshine wrote?

You are giving an opinion in this thread about a topic that you admit you know little about.

Just as one example, you mentioned earlier the topic of "tzimtzum k'pshuto"." Are you aware that the normative Jewish view today is a lot closer to the Alter Rebbe's view that to the Gra's?

[aygart]

Have you ever read anything else that Mondshine wrote?

You are giving an opinion in this thread about a topic that you admit you know little about.

Just as one example, you mentioned earlier the topic of "tzimtzum k'pshuto"." Are you aware that the normative Jewish view today is a lot closer to the Alter Rebbe's view that to the Gra's?

No, I never heard of the guy.

Meanwhile I have not given any opinions and have only critiqued the logic others have used.

Yes I am aware of that. It does not change the fact that some of the items were specific. As I mentioned, I personally daven nusach sfard. I have mostly chassidishe minhagim. On the other hand it seems quite clear to me that much of what is happening here is simply the reverse of when some attack lubavitch and make up the reasons after. It seems that there is a view here that the cherem must be totally wrong and mistaken now lets figure out why.

[zh cohen]

No, I never heard of the guy.

Meanwhile I have not given any opinions

You are making the argument that the way chassidus turned out over 200 years shows that the cherem was misplaced. I am saying that maybe it is only because of the cherem that chassidus turned out the way it did. This would mean that the cherem was successful and was the CAUSE of the success of chassidus.

What is this?

[zh cohen]

It seems that there is a view here that the cherem must be totally wrong and mistaken now lets figure out why.

Um, ye. I'm a chossid, so I think it's a given that a cherem on chassidus is wrong.

[aygart]

What is this?

only critiqued the logic others have used.

[aygart]

Um, ye. I'm a chossid, so I think it's a given that a cherem on chassidus is wrong.

Part of bikush haemes is to come to an outcome based on the facts and not the opposite and to realize that maybe something unpleasant can have a positive effect.

[zh cohen]

Does saying "maybe" make it not an opinion?

[aygart]

Does saying "maybe" make it not an opinion?

Yes considering that it is a direct response to a logical deduction of his but it is not only because of the maybe but primarily because of the context

[zh cohen]

Part of bikush haemes is to come to an outcome based on all of the facts and not the opposite.

The cherem is not the only "fact" that is relevant to the discussion of the truth of chasiddus. When taken in light of the many other facts including the fact that the black line in your chart moved closer to line representing chasiddus rather than the other way around, we can all agree that the cherem is irrelevant today.

My explanation for why that is so is based on history and yours is based on conjecture and "maybe." So which is fact based? Bikush Ha'emes does not demand taking an idea with no basis seriously.