- This topic has 12 replies, 10 voices, and was last updated 1 day, 17 hours ago by .
-
Posts
-
How come chasidim in bobov belz satmar etc don’t put a primacy on learning Chasidus and pnimiyus like Chabad and Brealov do today? Chassidus in the heim in my opinion was the first real kiruv movement but there isn’t that much kiruv going on in the established groups to draw people in. When did kiruv become a chabad thing and not a satmar thing?
The Divrei Chaim of Tzanz ZT”L who was niftar almost 149 years ago said in his time that it’s more important to learn Torah (what they call “nigleh” in lubavitch).
Totally different type of “chassidim”
Satmar is not chasidus. It’s about preserving the old culture.
No shaychus to chabad or breslov “chasidus”.Same word. Different context
I’m pretty sure neither of those movements (satmar/bobov) have the eschatological reasons to push chassidus like Chabad does. Remember even the word chassidus means different things to a Lubavitcher and another chassidim. When a Lubavitcher hears chassidus he hears Chabad chassidus, when another chasid hears chassidus, it could be from any branch.
(Please don’t pretend this isn’t true Menachem)Non Lubavitchers are often referred to as “polisher” or “chagas” chassidim, chagas is an acronym for chesed, gevurah, and tiferes. Those of you familiar with the sefiros will realize why a chabadnik doesnt read the sfas emes or chovas hatalmidim.
Remember the six chabad rebbeim leading up to the Lubavitcher Rebbe are likened to Zeir Anpin, with the Rebbe being malchus. This is the reason on the emphasis Dor Shvii, the seventh generation has been taught the deepest secrets (chabad chassidus) by the Nasi HaDor (LR) in order to bring Moshiach.
It is what it is
Let’s clarify some things: There are no Chassidus’s around today that learn their Rebbe’s Torah like Chabad and to a far lesser extent Breslov do. I doubt there ever was in all of history since the Mishna was written down. What I mean by that is that every form of Yiddishkeit learns their Rebbe/Rov/Rosh Yeshiva/Chachams Torahs and try to get through all of it. However, it’s always a much lower priority than Mishna, Gemara, Rishonim, and the basic Acharonim. And the focus is almost entirely on the seforim their leader put out, maybe other stuff he wrote is a passing interest. Which differs greatly from those who have set daily sedarim hours long for every age group to pour over a single Rebbes writings, which include the seforim he’s written, seforim compiling things he’s said, and down to mundane things like posthumous collections of every known letter he’s ever written.
These sects did not start in the same way.
Many Rabbis were Misnagdim that converted & brought some of their baggage with them.
The Divrei Chaim mentioned above is a perfect example.
He was a Rosh Yeshiva who was the son-in-law of another big Rabbi the Baruch Taam. He was part of the scholarly elite. So it’s not surprising when he “switched sides” he brought the focus on learning normative subjects with him.The Divrei Chaim was never a Rosh Yeshiva. His father was already a Chossid before he got married. He believed that Chassidus was necessary for 100-150 years and then all should return to the basics.
Satmar isn’t a chasdius. I think the reba zya said that himself. Its a kehila built on the principals of R Hillel Lichtenstein aka R Hillel Kamai. The idea is to build a community that’s spilt from secular forces (neollogs) with a string sense of community culture. Lots of inner infrastructure and buildings . The key is to dress and speak like they did in Europe and not be inlfuneced by the outside. Both Satmar and Skever founded thier own city for that reason. Its not “chasdish”.
Re Bobov, you should ask a better question. Tsanz was always into simplicity and giving out tons of tedaka to the poor. The heilga sanza ruv never went to sleep at night if there was an extra penny in his pocket not distributed to the poor. Its known that the devrai chaim was in a dispute with the holy Rizyna rebas who believed in flaunting wealth as a reba because its ,malchus and he is from dovid hamelch. (Of course as is well known the rizyna himself wore gold shoes with no heel because he didn’t want to enjoy this world. However, he felt that as a reba in public malchus is needed) So what happened to that mesora? Why fancy buildings and gold and silver by Tish? In fact, there is a story about the current lakewood skulner reba, that when he built his new BM someone came over for an important cause and really needed money. The reba gave him what they collected for the BM. When the gabbaim found out they were upset and the reba replied isn’t this for the kehila? We need it for a fancy BM before a poor person? It almost feels like Skulen who shtams from Ruzyhin switched roles with Bobov. What happened to simplicty and gving to the poor?I see the litivsher velt learned the chasidisher way of life, the Rosh Yeshiva and even mashgechim have gabbaim, they have bottas, ushsherin by the RY, have yaritz tish, take kivitlech etc. something unheard of 100 years ago
> I see the litivsher velt learned the chasidisher way of life
yes, assimilation. Even without such overt copy. And without admitting how far from litvishe mesorah they are going.
commonsaychel,
Add to your list tznuis both physical chumras and asifas,. Also, kashrus including only eating from your shochet. Then there is speaking Yiddish and living in a walled community.. And of course long davening. Todays litfish are often more chasdish than chasdim@commonsaychel Don’t forget about niggunim during davening and singing and dancing on Yomim Tovim. Side mention that the standard pronunciation of a cholom in the Litvish Yeshivish world somehow became Chassidish with “choilom” as opposed to “chailom”.
My 2 cents to add: AFAIK Belz preceded Lubavitch in kiruv in Europe and My Rebbe bemoaned the fact that changed.
I heard an apparently true story joke recently although I can’t personally verify for obvious reasons. Still the point is illustrating at least. a certain Rosh Yeshiva forbade his bochurim from learning Tanya. So they prepared a list of a few prakim for the RY to look at so as not to waste his time and still make an honest assessment. The next morning they asked his opinion on it. “It’s all about Hashem but where’s the Torah?”
For the ignorant, Tanya references many many sources brilliantly but doesn’t spell them out in footnotes, as The Alter Rebbe sufficed with a brief explanatory note in the beginning that is a collection of sources (apparently they knew more sources back in the day). But that actually isn’t even the irony.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.