1

The Messianic Doctrine

of the Lubavitcher Rebbe,

Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson

(1902-1994)

A thesis submitted to the University of Manchester

for the degree of PhD in the Faculty of Humanities

2006

Max Ariel Kohanzad M.A

School of Art Histories and Culture

2

CONTENTS

Abstract Declaration Dedication Acknowledgments PART ONE THE LIFE AND TIMES OF THE LUBAVITCHER REBBE Chapter 1- The Lubavitcher Rebbe as a Messianic Leader The Rebbe’s place in history The Rebbe’s messianic optimism and utopianism The Rebbe’s ‘Soldiers’ The Rebbe’s style of leadership Chapter 2 - Sources for the Rebbe’s Messianic Doctrine The Rebbe’s published œuvre Problems in interpreting the Rebbe’s thought The development of the Rebbe’s thought and religious language The question of censorship The editing of the Rebbe’s works Secondary literature on the Rebbe’s teaching Chapter 3 - The Methodology of the Present Dissertation The textual basis of the analysis The coherence of the Rebbe’s philosophy? Fieldwork and the use of dialogue partners Introspection and personal experience as a source of knowledge Chapter 4 - The Rebbe’s Biography: Between Myth and Reality The Rebbe’s Birth The Rebbe’s father as a role model of a Rebbe The Rebbe as a child Two different but competitive brothers The Rebbe as rebel: Hasidism confronting modernity The university years — a holy façade? The Rebbe becomes Rebbe: His reorganisation of Chabad The Rebbe’s death and the question of succession PART TWO THE MESSIANIC DOCTRINE Chapter 5 - The Messianic Scenario: The Rebbe, Maimonides and the Baal Shem Tov

p.5 p.6 p.7 p.8 p.10 p.10 p.11 p.11 p.13 p.16 p.18 p.24 p.24 p.28 p.32 p.35 p.38 p.39 p.42 p.42 p.45 p.47 p.48 p.55 p.56 p.57 p.58 p.60 p.61 p.66 p.68 p.70 p.74 p.74 p.75

3 Chapter 6 - The Rebbe’s Messianic Claims and Credentials The Previous Rebbe as Moshiach The Seventh Leader is the Messiah The Rebbe as Prophet The Humble and Clever Prophet The Rebbe as the Presumed Messiah — in his own words The Rebbe’s Prophecies Present spiritualization v. the miraculous future The Rebbe as the Actual Messiah? Chapter 7 - Atzmus and the Theology of Lubavitch Messianism The Rebbe as a Hasidic theologian of Messianism The Laws of Etzem in Hasidic thought The definition of Atzmus The Revelation of Atzmus (Gilluy Atzmus) Leviathan (Spirit) versus Behemoth (Matter) Matter as the primary locus of Gilluy Atzmus Finitude and Infinity The Rebbe’s transforming messianic doctrine Concluding reflections Chapter 8 - The New Torah of the Messianic Age Part 1: Moshiach and the New Torah Part 2: Two Aspects of the New Torah Parts 3-5: The New Torah and the doctrine of the immutability of Torah Parts 6-8, 12-14 The rulings of the School of Shammai anticipate the New Torah Parts 9-11, 15-16 The Cities of Refuge and the annihilation of the Evil Inclination PART THREE CONTEXTUALIZING THE REBBE’S MESSIANISM Chapter 9 The Rebbe’s Messianism in the Context of the History of Jewish Messianism Chapter 10 The Rebbe and the Problem of Hasidic Messianism Chapter 11 The Rebbe’s Messianism and Modern Orthodoxy

p.85 p.85 p.88 p.94 p.99 p.103 p.109 p.116 p.120 p.123 p.123 p.125 p.131 p.133 p.134 p.137 p.143 p.147 p.149 p.152 p.154 p.155 p.159 p.164 p.167 p.170 p.170 p.171 p.178

p.205

4 THE DECONSTRUCTION OF JEWISH THEOLOGY Chapter 12 Conclusion The Rebbe’s Messianic Thinking and the Deconstruction of Jewish Theology Appendix 1 ‘The New Torah’ –A discourse by the Lubavitcher Rebbe Appendix 2 ‘Miniature Temple’ –A discourse by the Lubavitcher Rebbe Appendix 3 Schneerson Family Tree Appendix 4 An anthology of messianic statements made by the Rebbe in Sefer Ha Sichos from 1990 -1992 Annotated Bibliography Primary Authentic Translations Primary-Secondary –Adaptations and Exegesis Hagiographical and Biographical Sources Context within Chabad Secondary Sources

p.209 p.220 p.220 p.231 p.231 p.261 p.261 p.278 p.278 p.279 p.279 p.337 p.337 p.339 p.345 p.347 p.353

p.355

5

Abstract

This thesis explores the messianic doctrine of the late Lubavitcher Rebbe, Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson (1902-1994). I have chosen to focus primarily on the messianic theology. The dissertation falls into four main parts. Part One sets the scene. It defines the questions that I want to investigate, the sources which I propose to use, the methodology which I will apply, and provides a biography of the Rebbe, highlighting the emergence of his messianic role. Chapter 1 introduces the Rebbe, his place in history, his messianic optimism and utopianism, and his style of messianic leadership. Chapter 2 outlines the written sources for his teaching and discusses the problems which these present to the would-be interpreter of the Rebbe’s thought and also highlights the dearth of secondary literature on the Rebbe’s theology, from the academic world. Chapter 3 discusses the methodology of this dissertation. It argues that any exposition of the Rebbe’s theology must be based on his ‘canonic’ discourses. I have attempted to ‘check’ my interpretations against the views of people within the movement who have acted as dialogue partners in this enterprise. Chapter 4 gives a brief overview of the Rebbe’s biography, which concentrates on the growth of his messianic consciousness.

Part Two is an exposition of the Rebbe’s messianic theology itself. Chapters

7 and 8, expound the two main ideas of the Rebbe’s messianic theology, viz., the doctrine of Atzmus and the doctrine of the New Messianic Torah. Chapter 5 examines briefly the sources of the Rebbe’s messianism. It argues that, the Rebbe’s messianism is rooted in a spiritualizing interpretation of the messianism of Maimonides. Chapter 6 surveys the direct evidence that Rebbe did regard himself as Messiah. Chapter 7 then attempts to set out in more or less linear and propositional form the complex doctrine of Atzmus. Chapter 8 offers an exposition of his doctrine of the New Torah, and argues that the heart of this New Torah is the doctrine of Atzmus. The exposition takes the form of a commentary on a particular discourse on the New Torah, the full text of which is given in Appendix 1.

Part Three attempts to set the Rebbe’s messianic theology in a wider

context. In Chapter 9 it is argued that although there are antecedents to the Rebbe’s thinking, the overall impression that it leaves is one of radical innovation. Chapter

10 looks at the question of the Rebbe’s messianism in the context of the history of Hasidism. I argue that the growth of this movement within Hasidism seriously challenges Gershom Scholem’s famous view that messianism was ‘neutralized’ within Hasidism. Chapter 11 considers the reaction of modern Jewish Orthodoxy to Chabad-Lubavitch messianism. It is structured in the form of a critique of a recent book by the eminent American Orthodox Jewish scholar, David Berger.

Part Four draws some general conclusions from the analysis, and in

particular tries to assess the extent to which, for all its Orthodox Jewish dress, the Rebbe’s messianic theology is radical, and challenges and even subverts Orthodox Jewish theology. A series of Appendices give samples of the Rebbe’s discourses. Appendix 1 provides a full text of the discourse on the New Torah discussed in Chapter 8. Appendix 2 provides a text of the discourse on the Miniature Temple, which is referred to in Chapter 6.

6

Declaration

No part of the work referred to in the thesis has been submitted in support of an

application for another degree or qualification in another University.

Copyright in the text of this thesis rests with the Author. Copies (by any process)

either in full or of extracts may be made only in accordance with instructions given

by the Author and logged in the John Rayland’s Library of Manchester. Details may

be obtained from the Librarian.

This page must form part of any such copies made. Further copies (by any process)

of copies made in accordance with such instructions may not be made without the

permission (in writing) of the Author.

The ownership of any intellectual property rights which may be described in this

thesis is vested in the University of Manchester, subject to any prior agreement to the

contrary, and may not be made available for use by third parties without the written

permission of the University, which will prescribe the terms and conditions of any

such agreement.

Further Information on the conditions under which disclosure and explorations may

take place is available from the Head of Department.

7

Dedication

To Yoel Kenny z’l who passed away before finishing his PhD

8Acknowledgments

The original UJIA bursary committee for initially agreeing to fund the PhD

My Friends and Family particularly to my grandmother Vera Martin with whose

moral and financial support made this possible.

To Rabbi Sholmo Gestetner whose initial advice, lead me to write this thesis.

To Dr. Joel Marcus whose enthusiasm and confidence in my abilities to complete

this thesis got me to initially go to University.

Undisclosed members of the Lubavitch community worldwide who have been very

helpful and supportive.

To Mr & Mrs Lynn and family for their hospitality and warmth.

To Michael Furnstein for his help and humour.

My thanks also to Dr. Daniel Langton for his support and advice.

And last but by all means not least Prof. Philip Alexander who has helped me to

formulate my ideas and argument in a semi-linear format.

9Gershom Scholem in the introduction to The Messianic Idea in Judaism explains

beautifully the struggle faced by the Jewish Mystic:

… [Mysticism] strives to piece together the fragments broken by the religious cataclysm, to bring back the old unity which religion has destroyed, but on a new plane, where the world of mythology and that of revelation meet in the soul of man … The soul’s path through the … multiplicity of things to the experience of Divine Reality … the primordial unity of all things, becomes its main preoccupation. … New religious impulses may and do arise which threaten to conflict with the scale of values established by historical religion. … These new impulses do not break through the shell of the old religious system and create a new one, but remain confined within its borders. … New religious experience finds its expression in a new interpretation of the old values which frequently acquire a much more profound and personal significance, although one which often differs entirely from the old and transforms their meaning. … With no thought of denying Revelation as a fact of history, the mystic still conceives the source of religious knowledge and experience which bursts forth from his own heart as being of equal importance for the conception of religious truth. … The mystic tries to link up with the sacred texts and sacred books of the old; hence the new interpretation given to the canonical texts and sacred books … it is hardly surprising that, hard as the mystic may try to remain within the confines of his religion, he often consciously or unconsciously approaches, or even transgresses, its limits. … It may even happen that its heretical nature is not understood and recognized. Particularly is this the case where the mystic succeeds in adapting himself to the ‘orthodox’ vocabulary and uses it as a wing or vehicle for his thoughts. As a matter of fact, this is what many … have done.1

The Lubavitcher Rebbe was one such mystic.

1 Scholem, Gershom, The Messianic Idea in Judaism, and Other Essays on Jewish Spirituality. New York: Schocken Books, (1995), pp. 8-10.

10

PART ONE

THE LIFE AND TIMES OF THE LUBAVITCHER REBBE

The primary purpose of Part One of this dissertation is to set out the questions which

I intend to explore, the evidence to hand on which to base the investigation, and the

methodology that I will pursue in analysing the evidence. Chapter 1 offers an

overview of the late Lubavitcher Rebbe as a messianic leader and briefly surveys his

standing and influence in the Jewish and non-Jewish worlds. Chapter 2 lists and

evaluates the literary sources, both primary and secondary for his messianic teaching.

Chapter 3 tackles questions of methodology. There I explain that my exposition of

the Rebbe’s messianic theology is based primarily on his ‘canonic’ writings. I

discuss the problems caused by an absence of reliable secondary literature on the

Rebbe’s ideas, particularly from competent academics, and how I have tried to

overcome this lack by fieldwork and the use of dialogue partners, as well as

introspection into my own experiences as a member of the movement who studied

for a number of years in its institutions. Part One is rounded off with a brief

biography of the Rebbe, to provide a historical setting and context for his messianic

ideas.

11

Chapter 1

The Lubavitcher Rebbe as a Messianic Leader

The Rebbe’s place in history

This thesis will endeavour to explore the messianic personality and doctrine of the

late Lubavitcher Rebbe, Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson, who was one of the

most influential yet enigmatic Jewish figures of modern times. A Jewish mystic

steeped in the language of an arcane religious tradition, he managed to reach out well

beyond his own circle of devotees to a wider world with a remarkably universal

vision of redemption. This small man, with piercing blue eyes and gigantic charisma,

became the stuff of myth and legend even in his own lifetime. It is possible that he

will go down in history, along with Shabbetai Zvi, Yitzchak Luria, Abraham

Abulafia, and Jesus, as one of the most eminent and influential of the Jewish

Messiahs.

The bare facts of his life, which we will consider in greater detail below,

reveal a man who moved with astonishing ease in very different worlds. He was born

in Nikolayev, Russia, in 1902, the son of a well respected but controversial

Kabbalistic Rabbi.2 At twenty-four he married a daughter of Rabbi Yoseph Yitzchak

Schneerson,3 the sixth leader of the Habad Lubavitch Hasidic dynasty, and gained

from him a promise that he would eventually succeed him as Rebbe of the movement

after his death. He then apparently turned his back on the intense, enclosed,

traditional religious world of his youth, and studied the natural sciences, Neo-

Kantanism and the classics at the University of Berlin, and physics and engineering

at the Sorbonne — two of the most secular, cosmopolitan and avant garde

universities of the time. He moved to America in the 1940’s and became ‘Rebbe’ in

1951. His radical, controversial, messianic message, which he propounded especially

in the late 1980s and early 1990s contains arguably the most profound Hasidic

thought of recent times. In it he flirts dangerously with ideas, which could be seen

2 18th of April (11th of Nisan). 3 Rabbi Yosef Yitzchak of Lubavitch (his cousin), also known as the Rebbe Rayatz (see Appendix of Schneerson Family Tree. Y.Y. Schneerson was born in 1880/5640 in the USSR; and moved to the USA (New York) in 1940s. He died on 10th of Shevat 5710, 1950.

12from the standpoint of traditional Judaism as bordering on heresy. (It is with the

exposition, evaluation and critique of these ideas that this dissertation is concerned.)

He passed away in Brooklyn, New York, June 12th 1994 (3rd of Tammuz,) leaving

no obvious successor and his followers in a confused whirl of messianic frenzy.

The Rebbe was one of the great religious ‘gurus’ of the twentieth century. A

New York based Jewish mystic, who was not media shy, he was seen by many

within the wider world, both Jewish and non-Jewish, as on a par with such figures as

the Dalai Lama or the Pope. His influence on those beyond his circle of Hasidim was

remarkable. Eli Wiesel said that ‘whenever I would see him he would touch the

depth in me. When I would leave, I felt for that moment I had lived a little deeper, a

little higher’.4 Dr. Norman Lamm, President of Yeshiva University and a highly

respected leader of Modern Orthodoxy, is quoted as saying; ‘The Rebbe … was pre-

eminently the most distinguished, the most important Jewish leader in my lifetime

and probably in the last century’.5 Hundreds of thousands of Jews from a variety of

backgrounds visited him in his unprepossessing Brooklyn headquarters. They

included leaders of almost all denominations within the Jewish world, from

Reconstructionist and Modern Orthodox to Lithuanian and Hasidic. Statesmen,

politicians, presidents, prime ministers, chief rabbis, mayors, members of the House

of Representatives, heads of state and government, heads of educational institutions,

doctors, army generals, scientists, artist, poets, writers, and philosophers, Jews and

non-Jews, men women and children, all flocked to seek his advice or blessing, or

merely to be in his presence. He was honoured by Presidents Nixon, Ford,6 Reagan,7

Bush8 and Clinton, praised by Margaret Thatcher and John Major, remembered by

Rabin9, admired by Shazar, Begin,10 Peres,11 Netanyahu and Sharon. He has had his

4 Eli Wiesel, Nobel Laureate, at the Presentation of the Congressional Gold Medal, Washington D.C. http://www.chabad.com/2.2.html. 5 Dalfin, Chaim, Conversations with the Rebbe, Menachem Mendel Schneerson (JEC Publishing: LA, 1996), p. 90. 6 Chabad Chronicals, President Ford on Chabad: "Your devotion has won respect and admiration”

http://www.chabadnews.us/Old%20Aricles/AT%2000020.htm (9th of Feb 2005). 7 Zakilkowski, Dovid, The Rebbe and The President Ronald Reagan. http://www.chabad.org/library/article.asp?AID=142535 (Feb 9th 2005). 8 President Honors Rebbe's Legacy Washington, DC — Friday, April 11, 2003

http://www.lubavitch.com/Article.asp?Article=31&Section=0 also see http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/04/20030411-2.html (Feb 9

th 2005).

9 The Rebbe, http://www.chabad.com/therebbe.cfm (Feb 9th 2005). 10 Avner, Yehudah, To Ignite the Soul. http://www.chabad.org/therebbe/article.asp?AID=213651(Feb 9th 2005). 11 Peres, Shimon, The Chabad Movement unites Jews Worldwide, From a speech by Mr. Peres in 1990 (prior to the elections of the Israeli Prime Minister).

13face on the cover of the New York Times Magazine,12 and was voted ‘the most

influential Jewish figure of the twentieth century’ by the readers of the Jewish

Chronicle and several online magazines,13 and he was posthumously awarded the

American Congressional Medal of Honour for ‘outstanding and lasting contributions

toward improvements in world education, morality, and acts of charity’.14 The Chief

Rabbi15 of Great Britain and the Commonwealth called the Rebbe ‘the greatest

Jewish leader of my generation’.16

The Rebbe’s messianic optimism and utopianism

Possibly one of the secrets of his influence was the intense positivism of his message,

which seemed to speak to the mood and needs of the times. He was an optimist

sometimes despite himself. This optimism was not spontaneous but thoughtful and

calculated. Once asked about his strongly positive outlook on life, he replied that but

for it he would not have survived as long as he had.17 It had grown out of experience.

He was not unaware of existential misery, having lost close family to the

persecutions of both the Communists before World War II and also of the Nazis

during the Holocaust, but this seemed to focus his mind all the more purposefully on

the positive potential in the world and humanity, and on the question of how one can

redeem the world. He took an almost magical view of the nature of reality, and

believed that it could be transformed by the power of positive thought18, a topic

which I shall discuss in detail in Chapters 7 and 12.

http://www.chabadnews.us/Old%20Aricles/AT%2000003.htm (Feb 9th 2005) also http://www.chabad.org/therebbe/article.asp?AID=213651. 12 Michael Specter, ‘The Oracle of Crown Heights’, New York Times Magazine, March 15, 1992. 13 ‘The Rebbe wins by a webslide’, The Jewish Chronicle, first week of Jan 2000. 14 http://www.congressionalgoldmedal.com/RabbiMenachemMendelSchneerson.htm. (02/11/03). 15 He even admitted that at one time he was a follower and devotee of the Rebbe, and only applied for and was successful in obtaining his position as Chief Rabbi because of the Rebbe’s blessing. In conversation, Manchester, 16th of February, 2003. 16 Sacks, Prof. Jonathan, ‘True Humility’, http://www.chabadnews.us/Old%20Articles/AT%2000024.htm (22/12/2003). 17 Deutsch, Shaul Shimon, Larger than Life: The life and times of the Lubavitcher Rebbe, Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson, Volumes 1 and 2. New York: Chasidic Historical Productions, (1997). 18 Wolf, Fred Alan ‘The Quantum Physics of Consciousness: Towards a New Psychology.’ Integrative Psychiatry, Vol. 3, No. 4 December, 1985: p. 236.

14He took as one of his more famous catchphrases a saying of the Rebbe

Tzemach Tzedeck19 and the Rebbe Rashab,20 which had dropped out of currency

because of persecution and the Holocaust, ‘Tracht gutt, vet zein gutt’, literally,

‘Think good and it will be good!’21 He understood this not just as a general guide to

psychological well-being and the power of positive thought, but as encapsulating a

kind of existential science of nature and behaviour: he saw, and argued for in his

discourses, an inextricable connection between nature and thought. This belief was

undoubtedly rooted in his own mystical/magical and prophetic experiences. It

became the basis of his message, and enshrined a principle on which he encouraged

others to act. He believed that the way we view reality, has a kind of ‘Quantum’

effect on reality itself.22 Each human being has within himself or herself the capacity

to transform nature and reality, to shape the destiny of his or her own life and of the

world. It is, therefore, the mind of the individual that ‘creates’ his or her own reality,

not just subjectively but objectively as well. The process of ‘thinking good’ actually

makes things good: ‘it makes a very real change in the outcome of the future event,

so that it becomes actually good in a very plain and literal sense’.23

There is no place for a negative fatalism in the Rebbe’s approach to

eschatology. The Rebbe took his stand squarely in the camp of the optimists. He did

believe that history was foreordained, but this foreordination was viewed purely in

positive terms. It was inevitable that the future would be good: like other mystics he

held that in the end ‘all would be well and all manner of things would be well.’24 The

fulfilling of the prophetic, utopian dreams of the Hebrew prophets was only a matter

of time. He was not unaware of the darker side of Jewish eschatology. This begins

with the prophetic visions of the terrible Day of the Lord, ‘burning like a furnace’,

and was developed in lurid detail by the Second Temple apocalyptists and their

19 Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson of Lubavitch (1789-1886). Tzemach Tzedek is the title of his most famous work, and literally translates as ‘Branch of Righteousness’ (see Jeremiah 23:5). 20 Rabbi Shalom DovBer Schneersohn of Lubavitch (1860-1920). 21 Schneerson, Rabbi Menachem. M., Sefer Hisvadiyot (New York: Vaad Hinuch 5750–1990), 28th of Nissan, 5750. 22 Ravitzky, Aviezer, ‘The Lubavitch Hasidic Movement: Between Conservatism and Messianism,’ in Messianism, Zionism, and Jewish Religious Radicalism. Translated by Michael Swirsky and Jonathan Chipman. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Chicago Studies in the History of Judaism. (1996), p.187. Wolf, Fred Alan ‘The Quantum Physics of Consciousness: Towards a New Psychology.’ Integrative Psychiatry, Vol. 3, No. 4 December, 1985: p. 236. 23 Sefer Hisvadiyot, 28th of Nissan, 5750. 24 The famous phrase of Julian of Norwich. See, Higman, Linda, Lady Julian of Norwich Some thoughts of a remarkable lady http://www.saintnicholas.contactbox.co.uk/archive/julian.htm (9th Feb 2005).

15successors. The ‘birth pangs’ of the Messiah are a standard element of the Jewish

scenarios of the end of history. But they play virtually no part in the Rebbe’s

thinking, and when he does occasionally mention them, he insists that they will never

happen. He held that the Jewish people had already repented, and, in view of the

Holocaust, could be reckoned to have more than filled up the measure of their

suffering. It was only the positive prophecies that were the focus of his religious

philosophy, and predominated in his messianic doctrine. It is notable that in the vast

range of texts that he cites from traditional Jewish sources, Biblical, Rabbinic and

Hasidic, he seems determinedly to avoid any with negative connotations.25

His messianism, then, is relentlessly positive: the future redemption is painted

in joyous, celebratory terms. It is to be anticipated as a time of festivity and

happiness, not an awesome Day of Judgement. He talked of it as a time of material

and spiritual over-abundance, illuminated by a new, overwhelming revelation of

God, a time of overflowing laughter, peace, love, and unity, a time of the union of

divine and human wisdom. In the future redemption he foresaw the healing of all

disease, an end to war, people able to be themselves and realise their full potential in

freedom, dancing in the streets, the resurrection of the dead, the annihilation of death.

He envisaged a growing existential pleasure in just being, which would continue for

all eternity. These are some of hallmarks of his visionary conception of the messianic

utopia.

He also believed that the redemption was imminent, and in many ways had

already begun. His thinking is marked by a strong element of realized eschatology.

He talks of the messianic banquet as being in some sense already spread before us.

The coming of the Messiah and the beginning of the Messianic Era were for him,

positive, self-fulfilling prophecies, which were inevitable, but could be brought about

even more quickly through the power of positive messianic thinking, consciousness

and action. He nullified the ancient Jewish decree that had banned hearty and

excessive laughter26 since the destruction of the Temple, because he believed that the

Redemption was so very close27. Joy and happiness were for him an important

25 Ravitzky, Aviezer, Messianism, Zionism, and Jewish Religious Radicalism. Translated by Michael Swirsky and Jonathan Chipman. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. (CSHJ) Chicago Studies in the History of Judaism. (1996), pp. 1-10. 26 Berachos 31a, Shabbas, 30b, Niddah 23a. 27 Sefer Hasichos 5748 Parashas Teitze 14th of Elul, Sefer Hasichos 5751 13th and 15th of Elul 5751.

16ingredient in the process of personal redemption.28 His view of the status of non-

Jews in the ‘Future to Come’ was strongly positive. In contrast to previous traditions

that envisioned the physical destruction of Israel’s enemies, he foresaw a spiritual

‘nullification’ of the gentile nations,29 so that they could ‘speak with a pure tongue

and all serve God together’.30 The Gentiles do not necessarily convert to Judaism,

nor are they destroyed or annihilated, but rather purified and lifted up into the Camp

of the Holy; they live morally and realise the divine in their lives. In fact at times the

distinction between Jew and non-Jew almost totally disappears in his thought.31 He

stresses, in line with the Talmud32 and Maimonides,33 the tradition that a Gentile who

keeps the seven Noahide laws is as holy as the High Priest in the Temple or

Tabernacle. This type of universalism is a distinct feature of his messianism.

The Rebbe’s ‘Soldiers’

With the Rebbe’s charismatic leadership and his universal and positive approach to

Judaism, rooted in the Habad School’s intellectual and spiritually inspiring religious

philosophy, many Jews were attracted to him, his teachings and his movement.

Through the Chabad-Lubavitch movement he helped to reshape and reinvent post-

war Jewry, attempting to spearhead one of the most determined assaults against

assimilation yet seen.34 His inspiring, enigmatic teachings, love for his fellow men,

and his clear and positive outlook on life, captured the hearts and minds of a whole

28 Faierstein, Morris. M., “Personal Redemption in Hasidism”, Hasidism Reappraised. Ed. A. Rapoport-Albert. London: Littman Library of Jewish Civilization, (1996), pp. 214-224. 29 Sefer Ha Sichos 5752 volume 1.p 214, Sefer Ha Sichos 5752 Volume 2, p. 368. 30 Zephaniah 3:9. 31 There the Rebbe distinguishes between two levels, the first is ‘God’ which corresponds to the Jew and ‘Nothing but God’ which describes the nature of the Gentile and the World. This distinction although semantically clear is nonetheless difficult to understand in ‘real terms’. However, there is still a difficulty, since I feel the Rebbe is purposefully blurring and playing with the traditionally Hasidic notions (see Tanya Chapter 32) of the ontological distinction between Jew and Gentile. I would argue that these two modes of ‘God’ and ‘Nothing but God’, may represent notions of the ‘Quantum’ creative potential in ‘Existence’, that of ‘Active’ and ‘Passive’ modes of ‘God’ and ‘Creation’. The Jew, in this scenario is the aspect of the ‘Creator’ acting on ‘Creation’. 32 Sanhedrin 59a, Bava Kama 38a. 33 Maimonides, Laws of the Sabbatical Year and Jubilee, Chapter 13, Halacha 13, ‘…and not only the Tribe of Levy [merits special closeness to God], but every single person of those who walk the earth who ... walks straight in the manner God created him ... behold this person is as sanctified as the Holy of Holies …’. 34 Ravitzky, Aviezer, ‘The Lubavitch Hasidic Movement: Between Conservatism and Messianism,’ in Messianism, Zionism, and Jewish Religious Radicalism. Translated by Michael Swirsky and Jonathan Chipman. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Chicago Studies in the History of Judaism. (1996), p.182

17generation of disenfranchised Jews who, in the aftermath of the Holocaust,

Zionism and the ‘Sixties’, were searching for a different, more dynamic and

authentic form of Judaism. They flocked to join his movement from all walks of life,

young and old, religious and secular, and soon transformed this small Hasidic group

into an army of emissaries, representatives and dedicated devotees. Under his

command they built an empire of Jewish devotional and educational institutions

which number in there thousands, and which can be found in almost every corner of

the world. Through the movement’s extensive network of educational institutions,

community centres and outreach programmes, the Rebbe’s influence was spread. The

teachings of the leader of a small, marginal Jewish sect were transmitted by his

disciples to millions of Jews and non-Jews throughout the world.35 The successful

spread of this movement in such a short time offers an important case study in

religious mission, which we cannot investigate here.

The movement and its emissaries throughout the world have become among

the most influential and vocal representatives of Orthodox Judaism in the

contemporary Jewish world. For many, both inside and outside the Jewish

community, they are the exemplars of authentic Jewish doctrine and practice.36 The

Rebbe’s broad philosophy of life has not only become the common Jewish

intellectual currency of many non-orthodox middle-class Jewish intellectuals (in

much the same way as a sort of generalized Lurianism became the common theology

of Jewish intellectuals in the late sixteenth and early seventeenth centuries), but over

time it has deeply penetrated and irrevocably altered many accepted norms and ideas

within the more observant and religious Jewish world as well. Thus the Rebbe’s

religious philosophy has arguably profoundly and fundamentally shaped the way

Judaism now sees and understands itself.

The Rebbe and his ‘renewal movement’ proved an inspiration to Orthodox

Judaism in a number of different ways. Most obviously many who were initially

opposed to the idea of ‘Jewish outreach’ have now taken it upon themselves to

35 Fishkoff, Sue, The Rebbe’s Army: Inside the World of Chabad-Lubavitch (New York: Schocken Books, 2003). 36 An extremely negative example of this, where the non-Jewish world identifies members of Chabad-Lubavitch as being symbolic representatives of the Jewish people was the shooting up by Rashid Baz of a van carrying Lubavitch Yeshiva students on the Brooklyn Bridge on the 1st of March, 1994, and the resultant death of 16 year old Aaron Halberstam, and the wounding of others on board. See: Murder on the Brooklyn Brigde, by Uriel Heilman in The Middle East Quarterly Summer 2001. Volume 8 number 3. http:www.meforum.org/article/77.

18champion this cause. Aish HaTorah, for example, has in some places proved even

more successful than Chabad-Lubavitch in attracting young assimilated Jews to

explore their heritage. Despite the Rebbe’s obvious successes, there were also a

number of significant failures. For example, his campaign, started in 1973, for girls

from aged three and up to light Sabbath candles provoked a religious backlash and

proved a public relations disaster. Nevertheless, despite such minor setbacks,

Lubavitch influence has slipped through the defences of the Jewish Orthodox world.

Its influence is evident not only in ritual practice and custom, but more intangibly in

the emergence of a more ‘Lubavitch’ attitude in general in the Jewish world.

Religious attitudes (in this case towards technology, wealth, the education of women,

and even issues of Jewish pride and self-respect), like changing accents or fashions,

are not easy to document, but they are hugely influential, particularly on the ‘not yet

religious’, or those seeking to find or return to their religious roots.

The Rebbe’s style of leadership

In the late 1940s, when the Chabad-Lubavitch Hasidic dynasty, at that time under the

leadership of the Rebbe’s father-in-law, Rabbi Yoseph Yitzchak Schneersohn,

moved its headquarters from Europe to New York, many of its American adherents

were indistinguishable from other Modern Orthodox Jews, as it had become the norm

amongst almost all Jewish immigrants to the United States to abandon the European

ghetto garb. They went about clean-shaven and did not even wear a skullcap in

public. Nonetheless, despite their outward appearance, many retained a strong

identity and affiliation to this Hasidic sect, and it was due to their influence on the

American government that their Rebbe and his entourage were able to escape the

horrors of the Holocaust and make a safe passage to the United States.

The Rebbe was, it seems, initially reluctant to take control of the small

Lubavitch sect, and he was only appointed leader after much persuasion from

esteemed members of the community. He finally accepted the office in 1951, an

entire year after his father-in-law’s passing. Aged forty-nine, he was a relatively

young and vigorous Hasidic Rebbe, and under his leadership the movement’s

adherents became noticeably more religious. How he managed to gain control over

his community, and reshape it in his image cannot be pursued at length here, but that

he stamped his authority upon it is in no doubt. Men were no longer embarrassed to

19grow their beards and wear black hats. In fact, in the Rebbe’s presence they

became embarrassed not to do so. Within his community the Rebbe enforced the now

common splitting of the sexes at weddings, engagements, bar mitzvahs and other

celebratory occasions, and even at the earliest of levels of education. He introduced

an official ‘Lubavitch’ ritual code for the Passover Seder,37 and eventually in all

aspects of religious life the nuanced religious rituals of the Rebbe soon became

normative practice among the movement’s members. A book called Sefer

HaMinhagim38 spells out quite clearly the detailed intricacies of this newly

emphasised intimate sphere of religious life and practice. It contains the collected

customs particular to the Rebbe and his style of Jewish observance. Since the Rebbe

embodied for his followers the most authentic ‘Lubavitch’ custom, they naturally

copied him.

In 1951 his inaugural discourse Basi L’Gani39, which we will discuss in more

detail later (in Chapter 6), clearly sets out his vision for the movement and his views

on his role as its leader. He leaves no one in any doubt that each individual is

responsible for his own spiritual growth and development, but he also strongly hints

that he, the new Rebbe, is the long awaited Messiah. He conveys this idea by

continuing his predecessor’s exposition of a passage in the Midrash on the Song of

Songs,40 which describes the ascent and descent of the Divine Presence in the early

Biblical period. The Midrash counts a cycle of seven generations during which the

Shechinah ascended from the earth to the highest heaven, and a cycle of seven

generations, starting with Abraham and ending with Moses, during which it

descended back to earth. Moses of course merited the final descent of the Divine

Presence to this world at the giving of the Torah at Mount Sinai. Moses and his

generation were the seventh in line from Abraham, and, given that the number seven

has great symbolic significance within Jewish tradition, so much so that it is said that

‘all sevenths are blessed’,41 the Rebbe argues that it was only because of being

37 Schneerson, Menachem Mendel, Haggada Shel Pesach — im likkutei taamim u minhagim (New York: Otzer HaHassidim, 1948). This appeared two years before the Previous Rebbe’s passing. 38 Greenglass R. Menachem Zeev and R. Yehudah Leib Groner, Sefer HaMinhagim (Kehot Publishing Society, 1966); see also Sefer HaMinhagim: The Book of Chabad-Lubavitch Customs, trans Uri Kaploun (English Edition) (New York, 1991). 39 Schneerson, Rabbi Yosef Y., and Schneerson, Rabbi Menachem M., Basi LeGani: Chassidic Discourses, trans R. Eliyahu Touger and R. Sholom B. Wineberg (New York: Kehot Publication Society, 1990). See further Chapter 6 below. 40 Midrash Rabbah, Song of Songs 5:1. 41 Midrash Rabbah, Vaikra Raba 29:11.

20seventh that Moses and his generation merited the revelation at Mount Sinai and

the receiving of the Torah. The Rebbe goes on to draw a parallel between Moses and

his own generation as the seventh in the Chabad-Lubavitch Hasidic line from the

Alter Rebbe, Rabbi Schneur Zalman, its founder. He argues that just as Moses and

his generation had gone out of Egypt and seen God, so too, through his leadership,

the seventh generation would merit to see the realisation of Judaism’s ultimate

messianic goal, the revelation of God, the descent and dwelling of the Divine

Presence here on earth, permanently.42

Despite the overtly messianic overtones43 of this and many others of the

Rebbe’s early discourses, his followers at first were not vocal about his or their belief

in his potential messiahship. Only some of those closest and most dedicated to him

seemed to have tried to convince people that he was the Messiah. Leible Groner, the

Rebbe’s first personal assistant, is said to have been actively attempting to convince

his dinner guests that the Rebbe was the long awaited Messiah as early as 1970, if

not before. It would seem that the Rebbe’s belief in his own personal messianic

calling was not inspired by any particular event during his leadership. It is not

impossible that he had some inklings of a messianic destiny even before he assumed

the leadership of the Lubavitch movement. These early stirrings may have been

reinforced when he became leader, and he began to reflect on the meaning of his

accession and the potential it held for him. There is evidence, however, that certain

events or series of events, such as the First Gulf War, had an impact on the intensity

of his messianic preoccupations and consciousness. The growth of a messianic

consciousness is a mysterious process, which cannot be easily traced, even in the

case of such a well-documented figure as the Rebbe.

The latent messianism running through the Lubavitch movement even in the

earlier period of the Rebbe’s leadership is illustrated by a story, set in the summer of

1975, told by a former student of a Rabbi Hunter, who purportedly had known the

Rebbe in his University days in Berlin:

42 Schneerson, Rabbi Yosef Y., and Schneerson, Rabbi Menachem M., Basi LeGani: Chassidic Discourses, trans R. Eliyahu Touger and R. Sholom B. Wineberg (New York: Kehot Publication Society, 1990). 43 In Al HaTorah Ve’al HaTemurah, p.65, Reb Velvel, the Brisker Rav, having read Basi L’Gani is quoted as saying: ‘He has convinced himself that he is the Moshiach, and we will still suffer from him’.

21I was a student at Mesivta Chaim Berlin for only half a year, and had not spoken to Rabbi Hunter in about twenty years. I phoned him in New York saying only “hello”, to which he replied, “hello, Saul, how are you?” He knew my voice! He had this habit of making appointments at strange times, so we met at 2:10 p.m., Sunday afternoon. I told him I had come to New York to pick my children up from a summer camp — a Lubavitch camp. Whereupon he suddenly turned his whole body around in his chair, his back facing me, and just sat there in blazing anger, glaring into open space for what seemed to be an eternity. He must have been silent for two minutes. I was dumbfounded. Then he said, ‘As previously mentioned, Saul, you come to see me once in twenty years, and all you can tell me is that you send your children to a Lubavitch camp? There aren’t enough other camps?’ He said that my children would return home saying that the Lubavitcher Rebbe was the Messiah, that Lubavitch would ruin my children.44

This suggests that the Rebbe’s messianic pretensions were known to some, or at least

suspected by them, outside the Lubavitch community already by 1975.45

The Rebbe’s messianic status was not simply an extension of the personality

cult that had sprung up around him, although he did little to discourage this aspect of

the movement’s messianic fervour. His messianic theology was clearly not the

product simply of external events, but something organic to the inner development of

his own thought. It is far more complex and paradoxical than would have been

necessary simply to respond to external events, and more at variance with what

Jewish tradition envisages the messianic unfolding will be. The Rebbe’s messianic

views seem to have been largely informed by his mystical reading of Maimonides,

blended with his understanding of the Baal Shem Tov’s essential message, a theme

that will be explored in detail later in this dissertation.46 For him the messianic

process was twofold, historical and individual. On the historical level he followed

Maimonides, and increasingly saw himself as playing the role of the Maimonidean

potential Messiah. On the individual level he followed the Baal Shem Tov, and saw

personal redemption47 as being brought about by the teachings of the Besht. Both

personal and universal redemption are inextricably interrelated, but not necessarily

co-dependent. The messianic era may come despite the continued existence of an

44 Goldberg, Hillel, Between Berlin and Slobodka: Jewish Transition Figures from Eastern Europe New York: KTAV, (1989), p.187, and Deutsch, Larger than Life, Volume 1, p. 122. 45 Deutsch, Larger than Life, Volume 2, p. 116; Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik is reported to have held similar fears, saying, ‘The Rebbe will turn Lubavitch into a messianic movement’, and, ‘The Rebbe has a fantasy that he is Moshiach’. 46 See Chapters 5, 6 and 10. 47 Faierstein, Morris. M. “Personal Redemption in Hasidism”, Hasidism Reappraised. Ed. A. Rapoport-Albert. London: Littman Library of Jewish Civilization, (1996), pp. 214-224.

22‘inner exile’. One may experience many of the benefits of personal redemption

even in a world in which some are yet to be redeemed.

Given the continued delay in the appearance of the historical signs of the

second stage of the Redemption,48 which, from a traditional perspective, include the

resurrection of the righteous and the rebuilding of the Jerusalem Temple, the Rebbe’s

messianic programme seems strangely Gnostic. In as much as the ‘redemption’

becomes spiritualised and the messianic figure teaches a redemptive gnosis. It

closely reflects the messianic ideas of the Baal Shem Tov,49 who believed that

personal redemption holds the key to universal redemption. The Rebbe saw personal

redemption as being brought about predominately by the Hasidic teachings of the

potential messianic candidate. Only when the messianic candidate has succeeded in

sparking personal redemption within all the individuals of the world, will the

miraculous nature of both the potential Messiah and messianic era become actualised

on the stage of history. The Rebbe considered that latent within every Jew is a

messianic spark, which need only be revealed by the study and implementation of his

teachings. The spreading of his teachings worldwide would ignite many individual

redemptions. These en masse would automatically bring about the universal,

historical redemption. Thus in 1980, when one of his followers asked the Rebbe to

reveal himself as the Messiah, the Rebbe’s response was, ‘First you reveal yourself,

and then I will’.

The Rebbe set about attempting to bring about a revolution in the thought and

practice of his congregation of devotees, and he has, at least on the surface,

succeeded. It is, however, questionable whether he would have regarded himself as

successful in starting the revolution at a deeper level, or in leading many of his

followers to the experience of true personal redemption. This revolution, which does

not merely require a change of dress, or practice or custom, but rather a

transformation of ‘the inner man’, is in the last analysis in the hands of the

individual, and cannot be imposed from without. Throughout his entire leadership of

the Lubavitch movement the Rebbe took upon himself the daunting task of trying to

48 See Chapter 5. 49 Dinur, Benzion ‘The Messianic-Prophetic Role of the Baal Shem Tov’, in Saperstein, M. (ed.) Essential Papers on Messianic Movements and Personalities in Jewish History (1992). Dinur, Benzion ‘The Origins of Hasidism and Its Social and Messianic Foundations’ in Hundert G..D. (ed) Essential Papers on Hasidism (1991).

23communicate the depth of his mystical insights to his followers, in the hope of

awakening in their hearts and souls an inner, mystical change. Towards the end of his

leadership, frustrated by the perceived lack of understanding of his teachings

displayed by his followers, he exclaimed in conversation with a member of his

secretariat, that his entire life had been a waste. In language reminiscent of

Ecclesiastes he said, ‘Everything I have done has been “Hevel v’lorik — Vanities and

all worthless, and for nothing”.’50 His movement as a whole has shown no greater

appetite for getting to grips with the more demanding aspects of his religious

philosophy since his passing.

50 Sefer Hisvadiyot, 28th of Nissan 5751.

24

Chapter 2

Sources for the Rebbe’s Messianic Doctrine

The Rebbe’s published œuvre

Studying the Rebbe’s messianic ideas is not easy. The most important source must

obviously be his own discourses and writings, but the sheer quantity and diversity of

these creates problems. Over the forty-four years of his leadership, almost anything

the Rebbe said, did, or wrote was preserved in some shape or form for prosperity.

There are close on two hundred volumes of his teachings, divided into seven broad

categories. They are:

� Sefer Hisvadiyos – (Yiddish) a record of the Hasidic gatherings

(approximately 50 volumes);

� Sichos Kodesh – (Yiddish) holy discourses (approximately 50 volumes);

� Likkutei Sichos – (Yiddish and Hebrew) collected weekly pamphlets (39

volumes);

� Sefer HaSichos – (Yiddish and Hebrew) collected pamphlets of particular

years (13 volumes);

� Sefer HaMaamorim Meluket – (Hebrew) edited, divinely inspired discourses

(6 volumes);

� Igros Kodesh – (Yiddish and Hebrew) holy writings/letters (approximately 50

volumes);

� Reshimos – (Yiddish) personal/lecture notes (approximately 6 volumes);

Each of these categories can be considered a slightly different genre of Hasidic

literature in itself; each has a particular role and importance within the framework of

religious life. The majority of these texts are a mixture of edited and unedited talks,

stories and personal reminiscences, and were originally said in Yiddish, although

many have been translated into Hebrew.

25Almost all of the Rebbe’s discourses are gathered in the collection known

as Sefer Hisvadiyos, literally the ‘Book of Farbrengen, Hasidic Gatherings’, which

provides unedited, written versions of the talks themselves, as well as an account of

the events at which they were delivered. It includes many talks delivered during

these gatherings, which did not make it into the later edited collections. These talks

might be considered the first drafts, or the ‘non-canonical’ versions, or the Tosseftas

and Baraithas, of the Rebbe’s teachings. There is a fundamental difficulty in using

these volumes, in that they are often regarded as giving an unreliable account of the

Rebbe’s ideas, because he did not edit them. They cannot be taken as the Rebbe’s

final and authoritative word on any subject. They were transcribed often from or

tape- or video-recordings of his verbal discourses and talks, and, in the nature of

things, are not always intelligible when written down verbatim.51 They can seem

disjointed and unclear. They are particularly difficult to translate. All the Rebbe’s

discourses pose problems for the translator, being composed in a highly compressed,

technical Hasidic style, but the unedited discourses are at times almost impossible to

put into fluent English. The pauses, the emphases, and other devices, which made

them easier to understand when they were spoken, have been lost in the mechanical

transcriptions. (The translations offered in this dissertation, both in the main text and

in the appendices, should be regarded as only rough and ready, aimed primarily at

conveying the general sense and the argument.) Some of the discourses were

delivered at times when using a tape-recorder would have been prohibited (e.g., on

Sabbath or High Holidays). The printed versions of these rely on the memory of a

particular group of individuals called Hozrim.52 Their accuracy must be especially

open to question. Yet, despite these drawbacks, there is an obvious advantage in this

particular textual source, and it is that often revealing things were said in the heat of

the moment, under the influence of religious zeal or mystical fervour, which were not

included in the edited versions, because they were apparently not deemed suitable for

public consumption. This source is the closest one can get to what was actually said,

short of having been there and hearing the Rebbe in person.

Sefer Hisvadiyos is the primary source from which almost all the other

categories were drawn after further editing by various kinds. The next stage in the

51 The tape recordings and videos themselves are also an important primary resource and many are available, but they are often difficult to use as a research aid. 52 This group includes R. Yoel Kahn, R. Simon Jacobson, R. Yosef Yitzchak Jacobson, R. Nachman Shapiro, R. Laible Altien and others. See further below.

26process was the collecting of the volumes of Sichos Kodesh. These remain

unedited by the Rebbe’s hand. They give an account of the thematic discourses

delivered on a particular day, or during a particular event. They are, in their turn, the

source for the Likkutei Sichos, which offers edited versions of the same texts. The

Likkutei Sichos are the general talks and discussions, whether on a specifically

Hasidic topic, or on a more general Rabbinic, Biblical or even political theme. They

are regarded as works of the Rebbe himself, expressions of his personality and ideas

in his position as a Jewish leader and thinker, but are not seen as specifically

‘divinely inspired’.

Sefer HaSichos grew out the Likkutei Sichos genre, except that the Sichos are

presented chronologically, starting with 1987 and continuing until 1992. Thus each

work is titled according to the year to which it relates, e.g., Sefer HaSichos 5752.

These discourses were delivered by the Rebbe each week; either on Shabbat or

festivals or at any particular time he felt was relevant. Since they are chronological in

order, one can often clearly see the evolution of an idea or theme from one week to

the next. They are for the most part printed in both Yiddish and Hebrew,53 whereas

the Likkutei Sichos are either in Hebrew or in Yiddish.

The next set of edited works, also derived from the Sefer Ha Hisvadiyos, are

the Maamorim, the ‘inspired discourses’. In their published form in the Sefer

Maamorim Meluket they were edited personally by the Rebbe. Within the Lubavitch

Hasidic sect there is a tradition that a Rebbe, and only a Rebbe, has the power and

authority to deliver ‘divinely inspired’ homilies. The Sichos are considered as

containing the intellectual teachings of the Rebbe himself, whereas the Maamorim

are understood as having been delivered under divine inspiration. The Rebbe,

although still conscious and using his own mind, acts as a conduit for divine wisdom

in the form of Hasidic philosophy and Kabbalistic secrets. The nature of these

sermons differs from regular talks and lectures delivered during a Farbrengen, and

these are marked in a number of ways. Firstly, the singing or chanting of two very

distinctive and deeply inspiring Hasidic melodies frames them. Secondly, in the early

years, the Rebbe delivered them with his eyes open, but for most of the period of his

leadership they were given with his eyes closed, in contrast to Sichos, which he said

53 Although there also exists an alternative print of the year 1987 completely in Hebrew.

27with his eyes open. A third sign that these discourses were special was that the

Rebbe would hold on to a white handkerchief tied around his hand while he spoke

them. The tradition claims that he did this so that in the throes of the supernal influx

of divine wisdom he could retain his connection with this world by holding onto

something physical, and so prevent his soul expiring and him dying. These

Maamorim were predominantly printed in Hebrew, and are generally given more

significance within the movement. They are of first-rate importance in establishing

an authentic account of the Rebbe’s beliefs. Maamorim were usually said on a

special occasion, either a Sabbath or a festival, whether a general Jewish festival or a

special Hasidic or Lubavitch one. However, there were also occasions when the

Rebbe would spontaneously call a Farbrengen midweek and deliver a Maamor.

Apart from the Rebbe’s oral discourses there are two originally written or

directly dictated sources in the form of letters and personal notes. The first is the

Igros Kodesh, a collection of letters and Responsa (Teshuvos).54 The numerous sets

of thematically arranged letters and Responsa reveal a fascinating world of ideas, and

expose some aspects of the Rebbe’s beliefs and personality that would be lost if we

had only his more traditional lectures or discourses to go on. The obvious

disadvantage is that these selected letters may not have general application or

relevance, and apply only to very specific cases and situations. In addition they are

often in a highly sophisticated Yiddish, which, in comparison with the Sichos, can at

times be challenging.

Lastly, I am told that there are at least six volumes of hand-written lecture

notes and personal jottings or Reshimos,55 originally published piecemeal in a series

of small pamphlets, which still circulate in this form. This set of personal writings

began to appear almost immediately after the Rebbe’s passing. They were said to

have been left in the drawer of his writing desk to be found and published. These

personal notebooks are a hotly debated issue within the Chabad-Lubavitch

movement, because they are in the control of the executors of the Rebbe’s will, who

are regarded as being vehemently anti-messianic at times. They have been publishing

parts of the notebooks slowly in an attempt to retain power and influence over the

54 Not to be confused with Igeres HaKodesh by Rabbi Schneur Zalman of Liadi. 55 Schneerson, Menachem M., Reshimos, New York: Kehot Publication Society, (2002), though not very easy to find.

28community. Given the auspices under which they are being published, they are

unlikely to contain any information relevant to the Rebbe’s messianic philosophy, or

anything radical about his early life, though they are nonetheless of enormous

general interest. They have the disadvantage of being in note form, and so their

subjects are not always thoroughly explored, or their ideas explained at length.

Problems in interpreting the Rebbe’s thought

All of the Rebbe’s discourses, despite the diversity of genres that they display,

broadly share the same distinctive and difficult style. In their original format they

read like streams of Hasidic consciousness. They are an often repetitive, mantra-like

chant, peppered with catchphrases and ‘sound bites’. They have a poetic quality that

attempts to open up the listener or reader’s mind to an unusual way of thinking.

During a discourse the Rebbe may pose a number of questions on a verse or ritual,

then go off at length, at times for several pages, on a seeming digression, explore the

subject thoroughly, and finally return and apply the lessons learnt from the digression

to the original questions. The aim is to try and disclose the underlying unity of

Hasidic and Kabbalistic thought, while at the same time demonstrating the authentic

character of this thought within Torah and the world.

It is important to realise how difficult it is to extract from these discourses a

coherent, systematic, messianic theology. Entire sections of them may be in biblical

Hebrew or Aramaic, and they will be liberally peppered with quotations from

Talmud, Midrash, Zohar or classical sources. To understand their esoteric, technical

language requires a sophisticated familiarity with classic Jewish texts, as well as a

thorough knowledge of the nuances of Hasidic philosophy. This makes them almost

inaccessible to people who have not been educated within the system, and they may

be challenging even for members of the movement. Their embedding within an

esoteric society and an esoteric tradition of discourse is extreme. However, as we

shall see, this may not be the only reason for the obscurity of the teachings. There

may be an element of deliberate obfuscation designed to conceal their radical, and

possibly even ‘heretical’ character.

Although the Chabad-Lubavitch movement is ‘evangelical’ and proselytising,

the audience to whom the Rebbe’s religious philosophy was primarily addressed was

29his own faith community. The average English reader would find attempting to

study the Rebbe’s Hasidic philosophy in any depth almost impossible, simply

because it is still mostly available only in a confusing mixture of Hebrew, Yiddish

and Aramaic. Even though the Rebbe was able to read, write and speak English quite

proficiently, he deliberately chose (with few exceptions) not to do so, thus excluding

the vast majority of the Western World from having easy access to his thought.

Although he played the role of a popular guru in the larger Jewish world, he was

primarily the spiritual and religious leader of a particular Hasidic sect, and he felt

that his main responsibility was to them. This explains why his religious philosophy

is not particularly well known within the larger world. Even within the Orthodox

Jewish community, which is generally comfortable with ‘Yeshiva’ language, many

of his teachings are not fully understood. Between other Hasidic and non-Hasidic

groups, the Hasidism of Lubavitch is commonly seen as being obscure, excessively

Kabbalistic and intellectual, highly complicated and very different from what people

normally think of as Hasidic discourse. For this reason Lubavitch technical writings

are often read only by heads of Yeshivas.

The Rebbe’s talks belong to a long tradition of complex theological/

philosophical discourse, which he inherited from earlier Hasidism, and indeed from

his father, who, although not an actual ‘Rebbe’ himself, delivered Maamorim, which

were deeply Kabbalistic.56 The Rebbe’s discourses assume a competent familiarity

not only with Kabbalah, but also with Rabbi Schneur Zalman’s main work, the

Tanya,57 and other major writings of the leaders of Chabad over the past three

hundred years. These works are densely technical, dizzying compositions, which

make frequent and detailed references to numerous metaphysical universes, know as

‘A’Biya’ which stands for; Aztilus, Briya, Yetzira and Asiya (Emanation, Creation,

Formation and Action) and also to the inter-relationships between the ten sefiros.58

They constitute what might fairly be described as ‘Hasidic Kabbalism’. The

originality of this version of Kabbalah has been seriously underestimated in the

modern academic study of Jewish mysticism.59 Scholem paid little attention to it, and

can leave the casual reader of his writings, especially his Major Trends, with the

impression that Hasidism had little to say on a theological level that is innovative or

56 Schneersohn, Levi Yitzchak, Likkutei Levi Yitzchak. New York: Kehot Publication Society, (1990). 57 Zalman, Schneur. Likkuttei Amarim – Tanya. New York: Kehot Publication Society. (1989). 58 Ives, Rabbi Yossi, Seder Hishtalshus. London: Yossi Ives Publications, (2001). 59 Scholem, Gershom. Major Trendsin Jewish Mysticism. New York: Schocken Books (1995), p.340.

30radically new. A few academics, such as Rachel Elior,60 have grasped the

originality of Hasidic thought, but much academic research has concentrated on the

history and sociology of the movement, especially its earlier periods. An indication

of this theological originality may be found in the fact that even academics, or

scholars from the Orthodox Jewish world, who are thoroughly familiar with the

language and ideas of the Kabbalah, in its Zoharic, Abulafian and Lurianic forms,

can still find themselves perplexed by Hasidic Kabbalah in general and the Rebbe’s

teachings in particular.

Although from the perspective of the outside world, the Rebbe’s teachings

seem highly obscure, within their own world and setting they are not. The Rebbe

does draw on older ideas and language from the rich Hasidic tradition, but his style

differs in certain respects from traditional Lubavitch Hasidism. It defines itself as

transcending Kabbalah, as a fifth hermeneutical dimension of Torah:

In the Torah itself there are four levels of interpretation: peshat, remez, drush and sod, and the teachings of Chassidus imbue each one with life and vitality. That is, in addition to the explanations which Chassidus gives to various subjects within all four parts of Torah (which negates the common conception that Chassidus arose in order to explain only the “esoteric” part of Torah) – the learning of Chassidus also infuses life into every subject (in all the parts of Pardes [the acronym for peshat, remez, drush, sod]) which we learn in Torah. And the subject then ‘lives’ in an entirely different manner, with an Essential life-force. This vitality strikingly illuminates and profoundly deepens one’s understanding of the idea.61

The Rebbe feels that his own Hasidism has a unique contribution to make to all

levels of traditional commentary in Judaism. He is attempting to devise a new

religious philosophy, which, although theoretically based on the four Zoharic levels

of interpretation, deliberately endeavours to transcend traditional Jewish

interpretation, Hasidic Kabbalism, and ordinary Hasidic homiletic discourse.

60 Elior, The Theory of Divinity of Hasidut Habad: Second Generation, Magnes Press: Jerusalem, (1982) [Hebrew]; Elior, The Paradoxical Ascent: The Kabbalistic Theosophy of Habad. Albany, New York: State University Press of New York. (1993). The historical/sociological emphasis of much academic study of Hasidism is illustrated in the important tour d’horizon of the subject Hasidism Reappraised, ed. Ada Rapoport-Albert. London: Littman Library of Jewish Civilization. (1996). 61 Schneerson, Menachem M., On the Essence of Chassidus, New York: Kehot Publication Society, (1986), pp. 33-34.

31This new religious philosophy requires not only a thorough familiarity with

Jewish sources both normative and mystical, fluency in the primary texts and ideas

of the Lubavitch movement itself, but it also demands the adoption of a whole new

set of religious ideals and language. This is not to say that references to Kabbalah or

traditional metaphysics are entirely absent. Rather they seem to have become less

important as the Rebbe’s new style became more familiar and accepted within the

community of his devotees. Other Rebbes of Chabad, like other Jewish thinkers,

from time to time discovered grand underlying themes within the vast corpus of

authoritative Jewish literature, but the Rebbe unusually seems to make a habit of

doing so. In his early works his style is saturated with the approach and language of

traditional Lubavitch Hasidic philosophy. It is obscure, abstruse and highly

specialized. It often provides exhaustive Kabbalistic references to the spiritual

hierarchies, and to the intricacies of the emanations of metaphysical universes called

the Seder Hishtalshlus. Yet, over the years a simplification of the Rebbe’s language

can be observed. His talks remain profound, but he no longer seems to feel the need

to invoke all the paraphernalia of the metaphysical universes. He tends to resort to

arcane language only when he is expressing traditional ideas, or, possibly, when he

wants to camouflage dangerously new ones.

This gradual lightening of the Rebbe’s style was probably not due to the

editorial process that his writings went through, but reflects a real development in the

workings of his mind. It is possible that, as the Rebbe aged, his mind increasingly

returned to what he understood were the grand underlying themes of the tradition, a

refinement in his thinking that took a considerable length of time. Throughout almost

all his discourses he avoids using big or complicated words; but his later vocabulary

is particularly small, consisting of approximately only some three hundred key

words. This might, as I said, be purely due to editorial decisions, or reflect an attempt

to cater to the increasing number of Baalai Teshuva (returnees and converts to the

Lubavitch fraternity), within the fold and the needs of the growing wider audience.

But the primary cause was probably a natural evolution of the Rebbe’s thought.

Despite the limited vocabulary, the increasing focus on primary ideas and

themes, and the escalating use of catchphrases, the ideas themselves, it can be

argued, actually become subtler, deeper and more problematic. The later discourses

can often be read at a relatively simple level: there is a clear message or set of

32teachings. Through the employment of catchphrases and certain well know and

characteristic kinds of logic, the Rebbe renders them superficially less abstruse and

technical, but they still contain elements that are profoundly mystical and taxing.

This difficulty is not necessarily located in the actual words the Rebbe uses, but

rather in the nature of the ideas he discusses. Superficially there seems to have been a

‘dumbing down’ of Hasidic discourse, so much so that the Rebbe’s Hasidism has

been described by some members of the movement as ‘chocolate covered

Chassidus’, 62 in comparison to that of earlier leaders. This is hardly fair, and

involves a confusing of language with substance. However, despite the apparent

reductionism, the Rebbe’s ideas arguably become less superficial; indeed gain

greater depth, the fewer and simpler the words he uses. By streamlining his

discourses the Rebbe seems to be able to pack more into them than before. More

connections of thought are made or implied, and a deeper message is conveyed, so

that some within the movement would claim that his discourses are actually more

profound than those of any previous Lubavitch Rebbe. The dictum of Hasidic

philosophy is quoted that it is a mark of the greatest geniuses that they can explain

the deepest concepts simply. The discourses of his final years (1987-92), which

contain most of his messianic teaching, exemplify this striving for greater simplicity

of presentation. Though they seem strange and complex to anyone not educated

within the Lubavitch system, they are intelligible to someone who has, and, in fact,

they are somewhat easier to understand than the earlier discourses. In the end it is

immaterial whether or not the Rebbe’s Hasidism is easier or more difficult, less or

more accessible. To learn it one has to learn the conceptual language in which it is

expressed. That conceptual language was a mixture of traditional elements and

elements newly coined. The originality of the Rebbe’s religious language should not

be underestimated.

The development of the Rebbe’s thought and religious language

The Rebbe’s theological language went through two broad phases, corresponding to

the two main stages in the development of his theology. The first phase was the

formulation and teaching of his ‘general philosophy of Judaism’. This broad

religious philosophy took thirty-five years to be expounded, understood and accepted

62 In conversation with Rabbi A. Lipsker in Tiferes Bachorim Yeshiva, Morristown New Jersey 1993.

33within the Lubavitch community. Gradually the movement’s adherents were

familiarized with the Rebbe’s style, emphases and approach to Judaism. The second

phase, which emerged out of the first, was the Rebbe’s ‘messianic philosophy,’ with

its attendant religious language. This begins to appear in the mid 1980s and goes on

evolving into the late eighties and early nineties. The Rebbe’s messianic doctrine is

found scattered throughout his discourses, letters and responses, often mentioned

only in passing, but there are significantly higher concentrations of sustained

messianic teaching in the discourses from 1987 to 1992, and these, naturally, have

been the primary focus of this study. Just as the Rebbe’s religious philosophy of

Judaism breathed new life and meaning into older interpretations of Judaism, so his

messianic philosophy, in turn, gave new meaning to his own philosophy of Judaism.

Individuals unfamiliar with the newer language of his messianic philosophy find it

difficult to grasp its ideas. Those familiar with the language of both phases can see

how and why the later language evolves out of the earlier, as though it had been

always latent within it.

This significant change in language and thought further complicates access to

the Rebbe’s messianic doctrine. The Rebbe’s teachings, as I noted, are little

understood in the wider Orthodox Jewish world outside his movement, but even

within the movement itself those who are really familiar with the messianic language

and ideas that emerged right at the end of his life are few and far between. It is

possibly only the members of the Rebbe’s editorial board who are in a position to

grasp them in all their ramifications. In the wider movement, apart from the students

in Yeshiva from 1987 to 1994, who studied them closely as they emerged, they are

not well understood. These messianic teachings, the final chapter in the Rebbe’s

unfolding philosophy of Judaism, are almost exclusively in the hands of these two

elite groups, the editorial board and this small band of Yeshiva students, who for the

most part have since got married, and either found employment or become Lubavitch

emissaries. It is these two groups who largely control the dissemination and

interpretation of the late messianic doctrine. The Lubavitch movement has taken on,

as a result, something of the character of a Gnostic society in which the true teaching

is guarded by an inner circle, a core of cognoscenti or illuminati, who are seen as

having had some sort of privileged access to the mind of the messianic master.

34This brings us to one of the recurrent themes of this study, the contrast

between an esoteric and an exoteric aspect of the Rebbe’s teachings. There is,

apparently, always a doctrine within a doctrine. This can be seen on a number of

levels. The Rebbe, as I argued, at the very end of his life, created a new messianic

doctrine, expressed in a new religious language, which his Hasidim found hard to

grasp in comparison with his older teachings, to which by then they were well

accustomed and which had tended to use the long established and familiar

vocabulary of Chabad. The late theology is, so to speak, ‘esoteric’ as opposed to the

‘exoteric’ early theology. But even within that late theology, as this dissertation will

attempt to demonstrate, there is a distinction to be drawn between the ‘outer’, more

accessible elements, and an ‘inner’, highly paradoxical messianic core which can

only be discovered by extremely close exegesis in the light of the Rebbe’s whole

philosophy both early and late. The inaccessibility of this later doctrine offered an

opportunity for those closest to the Rebbe, which they seized with both hands, to set

themselves up as the gatekeepers to the master’s teaching, and to use their position to

control access to it, and so exert influence within the movement.

There is no good reason to suppose that the Rebbe himself ever intended his

messianic teachings to be as little known and restricted as they currently are, since he

clearly encouraged the learning and dissemination of his messianic philosophy not

only within his movement but also throughout Jewish society at large. The Rebbe

had already begun, before his death, to teach his new ideas and his new religious

language to his Hasidim, and it seems that he fully expected that through the well-

established Lubavitch network of ‘evangelical’ centres his doctrine would eventually

reach the wider Jewish and even non-Jewish world. This has not, however,

happened, and there is evidence to suggest that a form of censorship has been

imposed by the ‘gatekeepers’, the leadership of the community. The reasons for this

are complex. The Rebbe’s editorial board and others in positions of power were

certainly embarrassed by certain ‘unseemly’ aspects of the messianic frenzy. They

may also have felt uneasy about elements of the doctrine, which are paradoxical,

anarchic and possibly even ‘heretical’. Once the Rebbe was incapacitated by his first

stroke, the leadership decided to stem the messianic frenzy that had gripped the

movement, and even the wider Jewish world, by controlling the flow of messianic

teaching. Self-interest may have played a part. The anti-hierarchical thrust of the

teachings actually threatened their own position, and once the master himself was

35prevented by illness and then death from adding to the doctrine, the deposit of his

unpublished teaching became a precious source of power — so long as they could

control access to it. Once it was disseminated and fully in the public domain, they

could no longer pose as ‘gatekeepers’ and their authority would be diminished. This

thesis, therefore, goes someway to readdressing the relative dearth of publicly

accessible information, and attempts to bring some profound and elemental aspects

of the Rebbe’s messianic philosophy to the attention of a yet wider audience.

The question of censorship

This question needs to be explored a little further because what I have just alleged

seems to fly in the face of the reputation of the Lubavitch movement for readily

publishing material from its vast collection of the Rebbe’s Hasidic discourses, either

in the original Yiddish, or in translations into Hebrew, English, Russian or other

languages. However, against this general trend, the movement has, on closer

investigation, been less than forthcoming with translations of the more overtly

messianic texts. Although the Messianic Chabad magazine Beis Moshiach has

attempted to fill this gap by translating various important messianic discourses, this

is by no means an adequate or easily accessible source. This reluctance to publish

specifically the more messianic teachings is limited not only to translations but also

to the original discourses themselves. It was approximately six years after the initial

publication of the discourses of 1992 that a second edition was published, not,

significantly, by the main Lubavitch publishing house, but rather by a breakaway

pro-messianic press.

There are, indeed, many books in English, emanating from Chabad circles,

which on the face of it attempt in various ways to address the issues surrounding the

subject of Moshiach.63 However, the majority of texts published in the Rebbe’s name

by the Chabad-Lubavitch movement are often so remote from the original, or so

obscure, that it is hard to see the connection between the Rebbe’s discourse and the

‘translator’s’ version. These English language versions of the Rebbe’s teaching come

in two main forms. First, there are adaptations, designed to appeal to Jewish middle

class intellectuals, which restate the Rebbe’s ideas in simpler language. In fact they

63 See the Annotated Bibliography.

36water them down and sanitize them, sometimes beyond recognition. Second, there

are versions that appear to remain true to the original ‘discourse’, but which actually

obscure the underlying message and make it virtually inaccessible to the majority of

English readers.

The following is an example of this process at work. It is taken from what

claims to be an ‘adaptation’ of an address by the Rebbe on the Shabbat of Mattos-

Masei 5751-1991. Here, not only do we find examples of the sanitization of the

Rebbe’s messianic teachings, the use of overly poetic and ‘fuzzy’ language, but also

the author’s unabashed, wholesale insertion of ideas that are not found in the original

text. He ends up advancing a position, which arguably runs against the whole thrust

of the Rebbe’s theology, as being the Rebbe’s own view.

The Jewish people, and indeed, the world at large, will join together in bonds of love and unity. An awareness of God’s transcendental Oneness will pervade all existence and this will produce a higher and more inclusive conception of unity than is possible at the present. In the present era, unity involves people of differing natures joining together. As the diverse limbs of the body function as part of one single organism, so too unity can be established between different individuals.64 Nevertheless, such bonds do not raise a person out of his individual identity entirely. On the contrary, his very awareness of self has to be employed to unite with others. In contrast, the transcendental unity of the era of redemption will raise every individual above the limited horizons of his personal identity, ‘For the world will be filled with the knowledge of God as the water covers the ocean bed.65’ The verse employs this simile to express the following concept: vast multitudes of creatures inhabit the ocean. Nevertheless, what we see is the ocean as a whole and not the particular entities, which it contains. Similarly, in the Era of Redemption, individual, created beings will lose consciousness of their separate identities, for they will be suffused with an awe-inspiring knowledge of God. The unity that will be established between individual entities will be of a higher and more consummate nature.66

Having studied the original discourse, I am convinced that the entire section quoted

here was actually invented by Rabbi Eliyahu Touger, presumably with the consent of

Uri Kaploun the editor of Sound the Great Shofar, in which this ‘adaptation’ appears.

It does not correspond to any part of the original discourse, and espouses an

64 Rabbi Shneur Zalman of Liadi, Likkutei Torah: Parashas Nitzavim, p. 86a. 65 Isaiah 11:9. 66 Touger Rabbi Eliyahu in Sound the Great Shofar: Essays on the Imminence of Redemption, edited by Uri Kaploun, New York: Kehot Publication Society, (1992), p. 68.

37eschatology, which is alien to the original, though possibly found in older forms of

Hasidism. The author of this adaptation has, in effect, foisted on the Rebbe his own

theological position, in preference to a straightforward account of what the Rebbe

himself said. The author’s emphasis on the loss of individual identities contrasts

strongly with the Rebbe’s actual attitude toward the individual self. We might not

wish to dissent personally from the fine universalistic tendencies of this piece of

creative writing. It is hard to find fault with the vision of ‘the world at

large…join[ing] together in bonds of love and unity’. However, we should not allow

the aesthetics of the passage to blind us to the fact that it does not give an accurate

version of the Rebbe’s own discourse, nor even adequately convey its general

sentiments. In short it bears little or no resemblance to the original. To make the

point crystal clear, Touger and Kaploun bring two quotes on which they hang their

own discourse: firstly a statement by Maimonides that ‘in that era there will be

neither famine nor war, neither envy nor competition’, and, secondly, a verse from

Isaiah to the effect that ‘the world will be filled with the knowledge of God as the

waters cover the ocean bed’. Neither of these is to be found within this discourse of

the Rebbe, nor even remotely close to it. The original discourse is found on pages

709-720 of volume two of Sefer HaSichos 5751, yet the nearest occurrences of these

quotes are on pages 630 or 804, which represents a gap of over a month on both sides

of the discourse on which this ‘adaptation’ is supposedly based. The attitude towards

the Rebbe’s own words and arguments is, to say the least, cavalier.

This is just one example of the editorial freedom given to those writing these

popular versions of the Rebbe’s messianic teachings. There has also been a

‘sanitizing’ not just of the English versions but also of the originals themselves. For

example, where the Rebbe mentions that a ‘Rebbe’, meaning the Previous Rebbe, is

‘the Essence and Being of the Holy One incarnate’,67 or that a Rebbe is ‘the Essence

and Being of the Holy One with a prayer shawl over his head’,68 these statements

were said to be temporarily removed from the second printing of the Likkutei

Sichos.69 It is possible to learn almost as much from what was not published as from

what was. Just as the silence in music makes it possible for the music to be heard, so

the silence, the lack of books, the ‘sanitizing’ and censorship of the more radical

67 The subject and issue of the Rebbe’s ‘divinity’ is not one that I wish to address or entertain at any great length here. For a brief discussion of this subject see Chapter 11. 68 Schneerson, Likkutei Sichos, Volume 2, p. 511. 69 In conversation with Rabbi Pinni Young in September 1993.

38material which the leadership believes will not be acceptable within mainstream

Jewry or the wider world, helps to bring out the fullness of the Rebbe’s message. An

example of the censorship of secondary material, which discusses the Rebbe’s

paradoxical messianic theology, is Rabbi Faitel Levin’s book Heaven on Earth.70

This lay in manuscript at the publishers for ten years, because its contents were

deemed too controversial. Only after careful and extensive editing has it recently

been published, by Kehot Publication Society, to mark what would have been the

Rebbe’s 100th birthday.

The editing of the Rebbe’s works

There is an issue as to how far the complex editorial processes through which the

Rebbe’s works went, calls into question the reliability of the printed volumes of his

teachings, particularly the heavily edited Likkutei Sichos, Sefer HaSichos and

Maamorim, as sources for his thought. As mentioned earlier, the majority of the

teachings were originally given orally by the Rebbe to his followers. They were

recorded in a number of different ways. Most accurate would obviously be those

recorded on audiotape or by other forms of recording equipment. Next would be the

transcriptions of these recordings, though the transcriptions inevitably lost some of

the pauses, emphases and the phrasing of the oral presentation. However, as we

noted earlier, there were many discourses that were delivered on the Sabbath or high

holidays when the use of electrical equipment was prohibited. These had to be

memorized and later transcribed. This was done by a group of individuals who had

extraordinary aural memories. Each would remember an hour or so of discourse, and

then at the conclusion of the Shabbat or festival they would repeat what they had

heard, thereby capturing the majority of the Rebbe’s talk. These ‘recordings’ that

rely purely on human memory cannot be totally accurate, however good the

memories of the memorizers might have been. Often disagreements arose about

precisely what the Rebbe had said, or the order in which he said it. These would

eventually be ironed out through discussion. The memorized discourses would then

be transcribed and published in Sefer Hisvadiyos. These raw, unedited oral

discourses, when written down verbatim are often barely intelligible. The can appear

70 Levin, Faitel. Heaven On Earth, New York: Kehot Publication Society, (2002).See Annotated Bibliography. I found Levin’s book particularly helpful in trying to understand the Rebbe’s doctrine of Atzmus.

39disorganized, imprecise and frequently seem to express imperfectly the depths of

the Rebbe’s teaching. The material found in the Sichos and Maamorim differs from

that in the Sefer Hisvadiyos inasmuch as it has been subjected to an extensive

editorial process first at the hands of the editorial committee and then at the hands of

the Rebbe. It shows signs of thorough editing. The ideas are laid out in a relatively

linear and comprehensible way, usually beginning with a series of questions, and

ending with a conclusion, which includes a prayer of hope for the messianic era.

There is a very small minority within the movement that questions the

reliability and hence the authority of many of the ‘edited’ works. They claim that

these in fact contain more of the ideas of the influential members of the editorial

committee than of the Rebbe himself. While it is indeed advisable to exercise a

hermeneutic of suspicion towards all the published texts, whether edited or not, this

is going too far. This view is undermined, firstly by the fact that the transcribed

versions of the discourses were almost always looked over by the Rebbe himself, so

that even if his original speech differed from what the editorial committee had

transcribed he had a chance to alter it if he felt it did not adequately reflect his views.

There is no evidence that he ever did make radical changes to these transcriptions.

Secondly, the Rebbe himself extensively edited many of his discourses. Even if the

editorial board reformulated large portions of the discourses, the Rebbe may have

been content, so long as he was able to approve the final text. The Rebbe did not

hesitate to intervene if he felt that what the editorial board had produced contradicted

the tenets of his religious philosophy. On one occasion he ordered the entire print run

of a particular edited discourse, which was ready for distribution, to be burnt because

he regarded it as misrepresenting his views. What this shows is that although the

editorial process may well have involved creative rewriting by the editorial board,

yet the Rebbe seems to have kept a careful eye on the process, so that even if the

edited versions do differ from the original discourses, they can, on the whole, still be

considered as the Rebbe’s work, and this is how they are generally viewed within the

movement.

Secondary literature on the Rebbe’s teaching

There is yet another problem which faces anyone attempting to study the primary

sources for the Rebbe’s thought in an academic fashion, and it is that strictly

40academic analysis of them appears to be virtually nil. 71 I would go so far as to say

that, there is only one academic who has probably read them in depth and in any

detail, and he also happens to be a loyal member of the movement.72 There has not

been, as far as I am aware, any substantial academic study of this textual evidence to

date.73 As a result, there does not exist a reliable body of secondary academic

literature to which the academic researcher can readily turn to for guidance and help.

This is a lack, which I have strongly felt throughout my own research. There is,

indeed, something of an academic literature on the contemporary Lubavitch

movement, and even on the Rebbe’s messianic ideas, but it tends to be based on

secondary sources, rather than directly on the Rebbe’s own writings. Or it is

concerned with recording the events of the messianic movement from ‘outside’ based

on sources, such as media reports, or with describing the sociology of the movement

from observation. It is usually either excessively critical and even polemical, or else

excessively romanticising. What it is not, on the whole, is balanced and well

informed.

Most of the available secondary expositions of the Rebbe’s teachings in

Hebrew and English come from within the movement and tend to be highly

hagiographical and apologetic in tone. They must be used with caution, but they

should not be ignored. They fall into the following five broad categories:

� Expanded Translations: these attempt to give literal translations of some of

the Rebbe’s edited works, but the basic text is expanded by all sorts of

71 See, Idel, Moshe Hasidism p. 247, ‘The recent events related to another messianic understanding of Hasidism, in the Lubavitch school, easily demonstrates how activism is able to change the course of history.’ is the only reference to recent Lubavitch messianic movement. Lenowitz, Harris, The Jewish Messiahs: From the Galilee to Crown Heights. New York: Oxford University Press (1998), pp. 199-

223, is too impressionistic to be of much use. . Ravitsky, Aviezer, Messianism, Zionism and Jewish Religious Radicalism (Chicago: Chicago University Press (1996), and ‘The Messianism of

Success in Contemporary Judaism’, in: McGinn, Bernard, John J. Collins and Stephen J. Stein (eds), The Continuum History of Apocalypticism (New York: Continuum (2003), pp. 563-81, has

some very perceptive things to say, but from a sociological perspective. 72 Dr. Naftali (Tali) Lowenthal of London, who lectures in the Department of Hebrew and Jewish Studies at University College London, is a well known academic on the subject of Hasidism, but also a senior member of the Lubavitch Foundation London. He is the author of the academic monograph, Communicating the Infinite: The Emergence of the Habad School. Chicago: Chicago University Press. (1990). Also his ‘The Neutralization of Messianism and the Apocalypse’ in: Rachel Elior and Joseph Dan (eds.) Kolot Rabim, Memorial Volume to Rivka Schatz-Uffenheimer: Jerusalem Studies in Jewish Thought 13 (1996), pp. 2-14 (English section). 73 With the exception of, Solomon, Aryeh. The Educational Teachings of Rabbi Menachem M. Schneerson. Jason Aronson; (2000).

41glosses enclosed in square brackets, which are meant to clarify the text.

They are heavily interpretative.

� Adaptations: these are reworkings of some of the Rebbe’s discourses. They

are often camouflaged as translations. The added material is so seamlessly

and inextricably woven into the original that it is impossible to tell one from

the other without a close comparison with the original.

� Thematic Collections: these are collections of translations or adaptations

dealing with a particular theme. They are useful if one wants to find out what

the Rebbe may have said or believed regarding a specific issue.

� Hagiographies. These are collections of miracle stories, biographies, and

personal accounts of the impact that the Rebbe had on people’s lives.

� Expositions and Reflections: these are attempts by individuals within the

movement to understand and explain the Rebbe’s messianic religious

philosophy as a coherent system of thought.

For my study I have found that this last category has proved most useful. The works

of Rabbi Sholom Valperan and Rabbi Faitel Levin have been particularly helpful and

I have used them where appropriate. Others whose contributions are also worth

mentioning are Rabbi Avraham Baruch Posner, Rabbi Chaim Sassoon and Rabbi

Tzvi Freedman. For their writings see the Annotated Bibliography.

42

Chapter 3

The Methodology of the Present Dissertation

The textual basis of the analysis

This dissertation is based first and foremost on the discourses of the Rebbe himself,

as recorded in his collected works. Of these, for reasons outlined in the previous

chapter, I have relied especially on his edited discourses, which I will call his

‘canonical’ works, in particular on those from the years 1988-1992, which include

Sefer HaSichos and Sefer HaMaamorim. These are the years dominated by the

messianic teachings, which form the backbone of my research. In attempting to

grapple with the ideas found within these messianic discourses, I have endeavoured

to treat the Rebbe as a serious religious thinker, rather than just as a charismatic

leader or guru. This approach has helped me to uncover, and I hope convey, the

depths and subtleties of his teachings, something which gets easily lost in the more

socio-historical approach to the Lubavitch messianic movement, and in the

trivializing, rhetorical sound bites of the ‘evangelical’ wing of Chabad.

I have built up my account of the Rebbe’s messianic doctrine from a close

and detailed textual analysis of his collected treatises. In particular, I have worked

carefully through all the discourses from the years 1988-1992 and translated the

relevant passages from Hebrew, Yiddish or Aramaic, into English. The anthology

primarily of the Rebbe’s messianic theology, covering the years 1990 to 1992,

included in Appendix 3 to this dissertation, is the fruits of this labour, I have

attempted to translate the text as literally as possible, which can at times make it

almost impossible to read. To illustrate the nature of the primary material still

further, its rhetoric and style, and its conceptual density, I offer in Chapter 8 an

extended analysis of one of the most important of the Rebbe’s messianic

discourses,74 which discusses the nature and role of the New Torah in the messianic

age (the text of this discourse in translation can be found in Appendix 1). A

74 There is another Sicha which is also important but has not been included here, namely; ‘Halachos Shel Torah Sh’Baal Pe Sh’Enan B’talin LeOlum’, in Sefer Ha Sichos 5752 volume 1.pp 27-36. And ‘B’Inyan Torah Chadasha M’itti Tetse’ Sefer Ha Sichos 5751 volume 2. pp. 566- 582. For an an analisis of these Sicha see, Kohanzad, Max Atzmuss& The Status of the Torah in the Messianic Era. at www.xlubi.com. Also see Sicha Shabbos Parshas Naso, 5751 volume 2. pp. 583- 597.

43translation of another important messianic discourse, on The Miniature Temple,

appears in the Appendix 2. These extensive translations function to underpin and

document the exposition of the Rebbe’s thought in the main body of the dissertation,

and to provide evidence for the claims made there.

In the previous chapter I commented on the problematic nature of the

translations of the Rebbe’s discourses circulating within the Lubavitch movement,

and noted in passing the technical problems of rendering intelligible texts which even

in their most heavily edited forms still retain much of the character of the spoken

word. I need now to say a little more about my own attitude and approach towards

the question of translation in its broadest sense. Quite apart from the basic linguistic

difficulties of putting Yiddish into English, I had to face the much more important

issue of philosophical reconstruction and translation. This proved particularly

problematic when I attempted to intellectually deconstruct and then to reformulate

the Rebbe’s views of materiality (Chapters 7 and 12). I quickly became aware that

although I could tentatively understand and present the Rebbe’s teachings in broadly

western philosophical terms, the very process of doing so was itself a major act of

conceptual ‘translation’. The attempt to expound the Rebbe’s teachings in a way that

makes sense within the academy, the setting for this dissertation, inevitably involves

restating his poetical, circular, paradoxical, mystical theology, in the ‘default’ mode

of discourse within the academy, namely rational discourse, and attempting to

present it as a coherent system of thought, which prima facie it is not. I have

constantly had the uncomfortable feeling that my endeavours to paraphrase the

Rebbe’s ideas in logocentric terms run against the grain of its own religious and

mystical mode of discourse which may possibly have been intended to subvert

western ‘philosophy’, which he knew well from his Berlin years. If at the linguistic

level all translations inevitably involve some sort of betrayal of the original, how

much more so may this the case at the conceptual level.

The problem is insoluble. For the purposes of the present exercise it was

unavoidable that I should restate the Rebbe’s doctrine in a philosophical way. Basing

myself on his canonical works, I propose to treat his teachings largely synchronically

and thematically. I would argue that philosophical presentation does not totally

distort his ideas. His thinking does, on sustained reflection, display a strong inner

coherence, and therefore it is broadly possible to present his messianic teachings

44within this dissertation in a systematic and linear fashion, and to portray them as a

consistent intellectual system. However, we must never forget that this is not how he

himself chose to present them, nor would one be led to deduce that such a system

exists from a preliminary or superficial reading of his works. Even those familiar

with the original texts may not see the ideas I argue here as latent within them, or

necessarily conclude that behind the texts stands anything that could with any

justification be called a religious philosophy or theology. The documenting of the

system is far from easy: footnoting every single assertion with precise prooftexts is

impossible. This is why I have had to resort to presenting long passages from the

Rebbe’s writings in translation, sometimes, though not always, with substantial

commentary. The reader is invited, having considered my systematic exposition of

the Rebbe’s thought, to read or reread the primary texts and see if the system fits,

throws light on them, and reveals a subtext of intellectual coherence. If I have

successfully achieved this, then I would argue that I have made a case for treating the

Rebbe’s thought as a rational system, as, in fact, a philosophy.

My synchronic approach is not meant to deny that there was a diachronic

dimension to the Rebbe’s messianic thinking. This is self-evident from an

examination of his works. His messianic thought did evolve both quantitatively and

qualitatively over time. His interest in messianic themes begins to manifest itself

slowly already in the 1950s, surging to a peak in the late 1980s and early 1990s, but

to trace in detail all the twists and turns of this development over all these decades is

beyond the scope of the present study. Nor should my labelling of the Rebbe’s

teachings as ultimately a rational system of thought be taken to imply that there are

not aspects of his doctrine which are extremely paradoxical, if not contradictory.

There are. I would not claim to have been able to reduce all the Rebbe’s ideas to total

coherence and rationality, or to restate them all as a Spinozistic series of interlocking

propositions, but I would suggest that I have succeeded sufficiently in discovering

underlying coherence as to establish the high probability that the remaining

paradoxes and contradictions could, with further effort and analysis, be brought

successfully within a system.

The coherence of the Rebbe’s philosophy?

45There are profound issues at stake here, which go to the very heart of how the

academy approaches such worlds of discourse as are exemplified in the Rebbe’s

thought, and which arguably highlight the limitations of the academic method. Just

because the Rebbe’s thought is marked at times by paradox, illogicality and

contradiction does not mean that it is therefore ‘irrational’. It is precisely this

conclusion that has led some of the few academics that have taken the trouble to look

at it to dismiss it as unworthy of systematic analysis or exposition. Academia as a

whole does not come to Hasidism with high expectations of rationality. Because of

its incurably romantic view of Hasidism, a view inspired largely by the writings of

Martin Buber, reinforced by the story-telling of S.Y. Agnon and the paintings of

Marc Chagall, it tends to equate Hasidism with the emotional and mystical, the

charismatic and inspirational. It does not belong to a domain where one would expect

profound coherence or logic. It is easy to tar Chabad-Lubavitch and the Rebbe, as

manifestations of Hasidism, with the same brush. I would argue that this is a serious

mistake, which ignores some very obvious facts.

The Rebbe was by all accounts not an irrational person, and his religious

discourse at times, for all its difficulty, patently shows a dexterous use of rational and

logical processes of thought. One should again recall that he had studied western

philosophy, and had an intensive secular university education. This counsels at least

caution in jumping to conclusions when one finds the coherence of his ideas

problematic, or his movement’s reaction to his teachings ‘irrational’. Rachel Elior, an

eminent scholar of Habad history and philosophy, criticises the movement’s attempt

to crown the Rebbe Melech HaMoshiach as ‘a pathetic spectacle that transcended all

constraints of Jewish tradition’, and calls an underground messianic publication

printed shortly after the Rebbe’s passing; ‘a pathetic culmination of the messianic

expectations.’75 Such modernist, judgmental views are not uncommon within

academia,76 and are espoused by some of the foremost experts in this field. Aviezer

Ravitsky, for example, who is a distinguished professor at the Hebrew University,

and a noted authority on modern Jewish thought, reportedly has also expressed

similar opinions. His contribution to a symposium in New York on David Berger’s

75 Rachel Elior, ‘The Lubavitch Messianic Resurgence: The Historical and Mystical Background 1939-1996,’ Toward the Millennium: Messianic Expectations from the Bible to Waco, ed. Peter Schäfer and Mark Cohen. Leiden: Brill, (1998), p. 402. 76 Geertz, Clifford. ‘Thick Description: Toward an Interpretive Theory of Culture’ in The Interpretation of Cultures. New York: Basic Books. (1973). pp. 28-30.

46book on the Lubavitch messianic movement where Berger accused Lubavitch of

‘heresy’ (see Part Three, Chapter 11, below) was reported as follows:

Mr. Ravitzky explained that those inside Lubavitch who wait for their rebbe to return from the dead and redeem the world may be foolish… He considered [them] misguided: ‘Torah does not prohibit a person from being stupid.’ Mr. Ravitsky also quoted Rabbi Aaron Soloveichik, the late Yeshiva University sage, who once said about Jewish messianism (as opposed to messianic Judaism, or ‘Jews for Jesus’): ‘It's silliness, but it isn’t heresy.’77

Such attitudes increasingly look arrogant and vulnerable even within the academy, in

the light of the profound postmodernist deconstruction of rationality.78 Moreover

they clearly ignore the philosophical nature of both Chabad Hasidism in general and

Lubavitch messianism in particular. The Chabad-Lubavitch fraternity has from its

inception79 defined itself as being primarily an intellectual movement, one that

strongly resisted the tendencies towards emotion-based devotion that were so evident

among other early Hasidic groups, and that prescribed a rigorous intellectual

approach to the understanding of the nature of the world and the service of God.80

The name Chabad itself, an acronym from Chochma, Bina and Daat, or Wisdom,

Knowledge and Understanding, reveals the importance of intellectualism within the

movement. Almost all of the leaders of the sect at one time or another studied secular

philosophy. The Alter Rebbe, Rabbi Schneur Zalman of Liadi, the founder and first

leader of the Chabad movement, was quite familiar with the Greek Classics. The

Rebbe Maharash, the Rebbe Rashab, and the Previous Rebbe all studied the various

philosophies of their time. Therefore to dismiss the Rebbe’s messianic teachings, or

his followers reactions to them, as ‘foolishness’, ‘stupidity’ or ‘silliness’ is premature

and unjustified. It is certainly not borne out by my own close reading of the Rebbe’s

works. It has been my own close reading of his teachings that has led me to the view

that the Rebbe, for all the superficial difficulties of his thought, is at bottom a

77 Yori Yanover, ‘Attack on Chabad - called unredeemable’, The Forward, New York, January 18, 2002 (http://www.biu.ac.il/Spokesman/Stories/jan_18_2002_2.htm). 78 Heidegger, Martin. What is Called Thinking? New York: Harper and Row. (1968; orignal German, 1954), pp.40-45. Levinas, E. Phenomena and Enigma (Chapter 5), Meaning and Sense (Chapter 6), and No Identity (Chapter 9) in his Collected Philosophical Papers. Pittsburgh: Duquesne University Press, 1998 (1987). Also, Hegel, G. W. F. The Phenomenology of Mind. Trans. J.B. Baille. London: Goerge Allen and Unwin Ltd. p.149-155. Rosenzeig, Franz. On Jewish Learning, New York: Schocken (1955). and The Star of the Redemption, Frankfurt (1921). 79 Foxbrunner, Roman A. Habad: The Hasidism of R. Shneur Zalman of Lyady. Tuscaloosa and London: University of Alabama Press, (1992). 80 Elior, Rachel ‘Habad: The Contemplative Ascent to God’, in Green, A. (ed) Jewish Spirituality. Vol 2 (1987). Elior, Rachel The Paradoxical Ascent To God: The Kabbalistic Theosophy of Habad Hasidism. New York: State University of New York Press, (1993).

47coherent, erudite and genuinely important religious thinker, whose ideas should be

treated with seriousness, and opened up to engaged and critical academic reflection.

As I noted in the previous chapter, detailed textually based studies of his messianic

theology are very uncommon within the academic world, though they are not

unknown within the movement. To attempt to rectify the dearth of textually

grounded discussion on the subject of Lubavitch messianism, I will not devote much

attention to the writings of the Rebbe’s followers, or to the circumstantial

information (or misinformation) found in the popular media, or to the writings of

those outside the movement, but rather concentrate my energies on expounding as

coherently as I can the Rebbe’s religious philosophy in his own words.

Fieldwork and the use of dialogue partners

The basis of my reconstruction of the Rebbe’s messianic theology is his own

writings, particularly the edited, ‘canonical’ ones, but I have complemented my own

analysis of his discourses in two ways. Firstly, I have talked constantly to people

within Chabad, and, secondly, I have reflected on my own study of the Rebbe’s

teachings while I was within the movement: I have drawn reflectively and

introspectively on my own experiences, though with caution, in the full knowledge

that they are a problematic, if important, resource. Over the years I have being

conducting this research, I have spoken to many people within the Chabad movement

from around the world, its emissaries and representatives, heads of Yeshivas, rabbis,

Yeshiva students, scribes, poets, social workers, teachers and academics, about my

ideas, in order to gain an alternative perspective and hopefully clarify difficult issues.

In particular I made an intensive research trip to New York in December 2001 and

informally interviewed a number of key figures there, to test my own understanding

of the Rebbe’s teaching against theirs. I spoke to Rabbi Leible Altein, Rabbi Levy

Garelik, Rabbi Nachman Shapiro, Rabbi Simon Jacobson, Rabbi Eli Cohen, Rabbi

Zvi Humnick, Rabbi Baruch Merker, and Rabbi S. Charitonov. I wrote up field notes

of this trip as a memorandum of what they said, to which I will occasionally refer

where relevant. These dialogue partners were invaluable in the absence of an

extensive secondary literature on the Rebbe’s philosophy. I was concerned that as the

result of years of introspective pondering over the Rebbe’s ideas, I might have come

to a highly idiosyncratic and personal understanding of them. His ideas, as I have

already stressed, are not easy, and I was entirely open to the possibility that I had

48seriously misunderstood or misinterpreted them. To be able to discuss my views

with intelligent members of the movement, who had heard the Rebbe, and had also

spent many years pondering his messianic teachings was vitally important. In the

course of these discussions a greater degree of knowledge and clarity undoubtedly

emerged. I found my understanding of the finer points of Hasidic philosophy in

general, and of the Rebbe’s theology in particular frequently challenged, and I

always tried to respond to those challenges by rethinking my position and going back

to the sources, but the general effect of these discussions has been to confirm me in

the belief that I am not seriously distorting the Rebbe’s thought, though many to

whom I talked, and still talk, would contest my account at various points.

Introspection and personal experience as a source of knowledge

I have already noted that the Rebbe’s discourse is deeply embedded in the life of a

very ‘esoteric’ religious community, and in a particular, highly distinctive religious

tradition. It is, in consequence, very difficult for outsiders to fully understand and

appreciate it. In many ways I am not an outsider. I once belonged to it and have

retained a strong although uneasy affiliation with the movement. Although no longer

a member of it, I studied in its institutions in Israel and the United States for close to

five years, and even trained to be a Lubavitch Rabbi. It would therefore, be dishonest

not to admit, that as a result of my own religious journey I do have personal biases

both for and against the movement and its religious ideology. This intimate personal

exposure to the Rebbe’s messianism has been on one level a very important resource,

particularly in the absence of any extensive secondary academic literature, but it also

has obvious drawbacks and dangers. I came to the writing of this dissertation with a

considerable amount of personal baggage and it has been a struggle at times to

maintain a detached and dispassionate academic approach, which I may, in

reflection, not have fully accomplished. As a consequence, I feel it is important to set

out a brief account of my connections with the movement, so that the reader of this

dissertation can evaluate the extent to which I have access to ‘insider’ knowledge on

the one hand, and the degree to which it may have compromised my objectivity on

the other. These reminiscences also, coincidentally, open a window onto the

movement at a crucial turning point in its history.

49I first met the Rebbe in September 1991 whilst on a school trip to New

York and within two years had decided to go to a Lubavitch Yeshiva. In September

1993, ten months before the Rebbe’s passing, I was seventeen, idealistic, and

enthusiastic, and enrolled in the largest Lubavitch Yeshiva for returnees, in

Morristown New Jersey, a little over an hour away from the Rebbe’s headquarters in

Brooklyn. The curriculum was intense, though not unlike that of many other

Yeshivas: the lectures began at 7.30 am and continued throughout the day, with

intervals for breakfast, lunch and dinner and prayer services, until 10.30 pm. Unlike

other Yeshivas, however, there was an intense focus on the Rebbe, because he was

understood to be the potential Messiah, and so the study of his teachings, and the

carrying out of his directives, were given cosmic significance. In addition to the

compulsory study of Torah, Mishna, Talmud, classic commentaries, Halacha and

traditional Hasidism, this Yeshiva particularly stressed the study of the Rebbe’s

messianic doctrine. This was because in 1991 the Rebbe himself had directed his

followers, not just in an aside but also explicitly in the strongest possible terms, to

immerse themselves in his teachings about Moshiach and Redemption. Fifteen

additional optional minutes were added at the beginning and end of the official

school day exclusively for the study of the Rebbe’s messianic theology, and the

evening slot that was previously allotted to modern Hasidic philosophy, was

transformed into the study of messianic Hasidism. Thus out of the twelve and a half-

hours a day for study, approximately four were almost exclusively concerned with

the study of messianism, or Inyanei Geula uMoshiach as they were called. As the

year progressed even the early morning lecture which was usually dedicated to the

study of older and more traditional Hasidic philosophy, found itself focusing more

and more on those earlier writings that were explicitly messianic. There were even

occasions when, during breakfast or lunch, a student would recite something of the

Rebbe’s messianic teachings, or small groups or study partners would additionally

learn these teachings during their free time. The Rebbe had taught that the learning of

these teachings actually hastened the Redemption and, as the Rebbe was not well at

the time (he had already had his first stroke and was soon to have his second), and

his health was deteriorating, efforts by the movement were stepped up to learn more

messianic teachings and implement the Rebbe’s many other directives. One of the

reasons for doing this was to speed his recovery and his ultimate revelation as the

true and historical Messiah. It was important to find ways of bringing the

50Redemption, and spending ever more time studying and learning the Rebbe’s

messianic teachings was seen as one of the most powerful ways of doing this.

I and many of my peers threw ourselves into this study. Since the Rebbe’s

teachings were new, and such an intense focus on messianism had not yet previously

been part of the curriculum, nor seen as such a pressing religious imperative, no one

had much prior knowledge of the subject. We were all, together with the regular

Lubavitch Yeshiva students, more or less on a par and a friendly competitiveness

developed over the acquisition of, and expertise in these teachings. However,

because of this and perhaps because there seemed to be something innately

disturbing about such an intense focus on messianism, many even within the

Messianic camp did not continue, or keep up the relentless study of the subject for

very long. Those who did soon found themselves becoming relatively proficient in

them. I was one of those who continued to study the messianic teachings even when

they became somewhat less fashionable.

That one academic year solidified the importance of the study of the Rebbe’s

messianic teachings in my mind and when the Rebbe passed away, I was one of the

young members of the small crowd that ate, drank, danced and sang outside his

headquarters on the early morning of his funeral, initially believing that the Rebbe

had miraculously recovered and returned to his headquarters to announce the start of

the true and complete Redemption. However, as the day dragged on and the actual

Redemption did not seem to be happening as quickly as anticipated, and it began to

dawn on us that it was quite possible that the Rebbe had actually died, the singing

and dancing soon became a chant, prayer and declaration of our hope and belief in

his imminent resurrection as the actual, historical Messiah, and in the speedy

redemption that he would help to usher in. The messianic movement, of which I was

a part, continued despite the Rebbe’s passing. Within a week, small-scale,

underground publications appeared which found hints and allusions to the Rebbe

having anticipated his own passing, and that his death did not in anyway affect his

candidacy as the potential messiah, some claiming that it was even an important part

of the messianic process.

I spent the next four years in different Lubavitch Yeshivas around the world,

all the while learning and relearning the messianic teachings I had studied in the first

51Yeshiva. This process of reflecting again and again on these ideas helped me to

begin to see them as a coherent whole and to begin to formulate them as a

philosophy in their own right. I felt that this treatment of the Rebbe’s teachings was

possible and in some sense justifiable, because of the nature of the educational

process within the Yeshivas at which I studied. As long as one remained within the

confines of Orthodox Judaism, loyal to its distinctive style of study and observant of

the parameters of traditional exegesis and debate, they actively encouraged vigorous

intellectual activity, and did not reject attempts at philosophising.

Within the Yeshiva world there is an important difference made between two

basic and distinctive styles of study, viz., Iyun and Girsa, which denote respectively

‘in-depth’ and ‘superficial’ modes of learning. However, Iyun in the context of

Hasidic learning, and particularly in the context of the study of the Rebbe’s

messianic teachings, takes on deeper significance. It implies an in-depth study of the

text, but additionally it requires a process of internalising and of living with these

ideas. There is an accepted method for the in-depth study of the Rebbe’s Hasidism

that one is supposed to adopt. This method is meant to aid both its deeper

comprehension and the process of its internalisation. There must be an openness and

subservience to the text and to the ideas contained within it as they are in themselves,

as a given, and at the same time also a willingness to bring to the study of the subject

every possible intellectual tool that is at the individual’s command. The individual is

encouraged to employ all of his intellectual capacities to understand and internalise

the subject. This will include comparison and contrast with similar ideas that have

previously been learnt to see how and where the new ideas fit in. One explores the

ramifications of the new ideas for one’s existing worldview, and adjusts that

worldview accordingly. There is a strong presumption of the ultimate unity of truth, a

sense that the new ideas cannot, however much they may appear to do so, contradict

the old, but must somehow be embraced by a wider ‘narrative’ in which they are

both true.81 There is a huge emphasis on making connections, linking new to old, and

it is in the forging of this interconnectedness that real learning is said to take place,

and the new ideas and language become meaningful and significant. It is held that

new neural pathways are created that join and strengthen the older ones. A whole

81 Talmud Eiruvin 13b: “For three years there was a dispute between Beth Shammai and Beth Hillel, the former asserting, ‘The halachah is in agreement with our views’ and the latter contending, ‘The halachah is in agreement with our views’. Then a bas kol issued announcing, ‘[The utterances of] both are the words of the living God.’”

52network of interconnectedness is exposed through which one glimpses the unity of

all things — the meaning of life, the knowledge of God, the nature of reality and of

the self. This leads to intense moments of intellectual and existential joy, which are

thought of as a foretaste of personal redemption, which always has a strong noetic

component in Chabad.

The majority of these educational values are not, of course, alien to the

academic environment. However, though on the whole historical disparity and

difference do not pose a difficulty to the academic style of investigation, distilling

such differences without proposing an ultimate reconciliation would be difficult

within the Chabad-Lubavitch religious educational system. Additionally, it is hard

from an academic perspective to appreciate the extent to which study and the

transformation of the self are seen as inextricably linked together within Judaism in

general and Chabad in particular. At a time when secular educational theory is

increasingly stressing education as the acquisition of transferable skills of use to the

economy, the concept of education as primarily Bildung (‘formation’) is becoming

harder for secular educators to understand.

Having spent years studying the Rebbe’s messianic philosophy as one of the

initiated and as an enthusiastic devotee, I slowly became aware that it contained a

subtext, something implied ‘between the lines’. As the glimpses of this subtext

became more frequent and grew in clarity, they became, more and more disturbing,

because what I saw seemed to challenge and undermine traditional Jewish values, as

I understood them. This was especially disturbing to me because I regarded myself as

an Orthodox Jew. I discussed some of these concerns with friends, Rabbis and

different members of the community. However, the more I attempted to convey what

I felt, the more I realised that I was talking a very different language from everyone

else. When questioned about this by two of my fellow students on the rabbinical

ordination course, I asked them when the last time was that they had studied the

Rebbe’s teachings of 1992. They both looked at each other and then at me with a

puzzled expression and replied, ‘In 1992!’ It then dawned on me that I had continued

to study and meditate on the Rebbe’s messianic theology when almost all of my

peers even many within the messianic camp, had stopped doing so. I had wrongly

assumed that everyone else was continuing to take the Rebbe’s messianic philosophy

seriously. At that time I was still continuing to do outreach work, talking to people

53who where not part of the movement, and I found that if I distilled the Rebbe’s

ideas, and put them into non-technical English, they were met with a ready

comprehension and appreciation. Since on the whole the Chabad-Lubavitch

community did not seem to be much interested in relating to the Rebbe’s intellectual

and theological legacy at any depth, I began to talk about the Rebbe’s messianism to

academics of religion, who, to my surprise, seemed more interested and able to

understand the Rebbe’s ideas, and so I decided to continue to explore them in an

academic context, and under academic guidance.

It was my intense study of the Rebbe’s messianic teaching that first alerted

me to a conceptual divide that distinguished my worldview from those of many other

members of the Lubavitch fraternity, as mentioned earlier. My understanding and

internalisation of these messianic teachings has in someway eventually taken me

‘beyond’ the limitations of contemporary and normative traditional Judaism. I

believe that I am still, in some way, a follower and devotee of the Rebbe, yet on the

other have found it almost impossible to identify with the Lubavitch community at

large, because I feel they have not understood the radical implications of many of the

Rebbe’s teachings. I still in some sense identify myself as a ‘Lubavitcher’, although I

doubt that anyone either within or outside of the movement would agree.

I have provided this narrative of self-reflection because I am aware that my

personal experiences may bias me and compromise my ‘academic objectivity’,

although I am personally doubtful if such a state of impartiality actually exists within

the parameters of human experience. However, I am particular conscious of the

effect on my work of my attitude towards the political split that has opened up within

the Chabad-Lubavitch fraternity between the Messianists and Anti-Messianists. This

is because the knowledge I acquired, and the experiences to which I was exposed

while within the Lubavitch education system were almost exclusively ‘messianic’. I

was aware that there were other sides and differing opinions within the movement.

However, my sympathies and my leanings are towards the messianic camp since I

believe they are ‘truer’ to the Rebbe’s messianic teachings and approach his texts

more honestly and seriously. Publications such as Rabbi Rappaport’s response to

David Berger, in which he seems to deny the existence of any statement by the

54Rebbe himself affirming his own messianic potential,82 I find totally indefensible,

and massively refuted by the evidence contained in this dissertation. It is clearly

motivated by apologetic, and is a dubious application of the Talmudic principle of

dissembling towards one’s enemy ‘for the sake of peace’.

On the more positive side, I would argue that my personal exposure to the

inner workings of the Chabad fraternity, and my experience of the messianic

upheaval, in which I was caught up, has given me an insider’s view of the texts, the

ideas and the Chabad mentality. If I had not been within this messianic movement at

such a crucial point in its history, I would have not been taught the Rebbe’s new

religious language and ideas, and I would not, therefore, have been as well placed to

get to grips with them. I am able to see the Rebbe’s messianic teachings largely from

within the movement to which they were addressed, and from the standpoint from

which they were meant to be understood. I do not, however, underestimate the

problems of translating that knowledge into language, which will be understood in an

academic context, and be appropriate to it. My approach to the Rebbe’s messianic

theology is, as I said before, fundamentally textual. I will attempt to expound it on

the basis of his actual words as contained primarily in his edited, public discourses.

But in the absence of a developed secondary literature on the subject either within

academia, or even within the movement, I will bring to bear on this reading of the

texts my own educational experience within the movement, and my discussion of the

issues raised with informed members. I have concluded from my analysis of the texts

that they do presuppose a coherent system of ideas, a genuine religious philosophy. It

is that which I have sought synchronically to expound, documenting it as thoroughly

as I am able.

82 Rapoport, Chaim. The Messiah Problem – Berger, the Angel and the Scandal of Reckless Indiscrimination. Ilford: Anonymous publishing. (2002) p. 77; also p. 30 fn. 76, and pp. 33, 36, 40-41, 78, 81. What is more worrying is that the author may actually believe the views he is advocating. On David Berger’s views of Chabad messianism see Part Three, Chapter 11.

55

Chapter 4

The Rebbe’s Biography: Between Myth and Reality

In the case of most religious leaders, and this is especially true for the Hasidic

Masters, their teachings and their existence are inextricably connected. Their

everyday lives are seen by their followers as expressions and outworkings of an

enduring system of thought and of a general approach to life. As the Maggid was

supposed to have said concerning the Besht, ‘I go to my Rebbe not only to hear what

he teaches, but also to see how he ties and unties his shoe-laces.’ It is here in the area

between theory and action that puzzling questions arise, and clues may be found

about the real person behind the myth. In discussing the life of the Lubavitcher

Rebbe, Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson, we encounter very serious problems

in drawing the line between fact and fiction. It seems that there is almost nothing that

can be said about him that does not provoke strong disagreement. There are a number

of reasons for this. He was very careful and clever at constructing and sustaining his

own public persona and image. He was mythologized by his followers even in his

own lifetime: most of the ‘biographies’ that have been written of him are largely

hagiography. But the most basic reason is that there is actually surprisingly little

known about him before he assumed leadership of the Lubavitch fraternity, and the

implications of some of the things we do know do not sit well with many people’s

perceptions of him. The basic historical facts of his life — where he was born, where

he visited, the universities he attended, the jobs he had, the people he knew, the

woman he married, where he lived — all have been wrapped in clouds of awe,

reverence and mystery. Penetrating this aura of sainthood to gain a more intimate

knowledge of the man, and of the workings of his mind, is not easy. That having

been said, I cannot claim that I have been able to entirely penetrate this veil. Where

appropriate and in the absence of hard historical fact, I have used the theoretically

plausible hagiographical anecdotes. What follows is a short biography pieced

together from a variety of sources, including tradition and hearsay within the

movement and personal experience, as well as the officially censored Lubavitch

56biography called Yemei HaMelech, and the more controversial83 biography entitled

Larger Than Life84 (see Annotated Bibliography).

The Rebbe’s birth

The Rebbe was born in Nikolayev, Russia, on the Eleventh of Nissan, April 18th,

1902, to Rabbi Levy Yitzchak Schneerson (1878-1944), great-grandson of the

Tzemach Tzedek’s oldest son, and Rebetzen Channa (1880-1964), a daughter of a

local and well respected business man. The young Menachem Mendel was his

parents’ first child. Just before his birth they received special instructions from the

Rebbe Rashab, the then Rebbe of Lubavitch, as to how they were to treat their young

child. Within the Orthodox Jewish communities children are not made to wear

religious garments or forced to carry out religious rituals until the age of three.

Within some devout communities exceptions are made for very special souls. The

young Mendel was deemed one such exception. His parents were told to wash his

hands in the prescribed religious manner every day, and to dress him in Tzitzit and

skullcap almost from his birth.85 Thus the Rebbe was born into a life of religious

obligation and ritual, and may not have been allowed to enjoy the same unrestricted

childhood that many of the children of his age enjoyed. This may have affected how

he understood himself compared to other children. The effects of such treatment on

the growing boy are hard to assess, but such an early initiation into the burdens of

religious duty may have made the Rebbe believe that he was different, and fostered

in him a sense of religious destiny.

In Eastern Europe in the early twentieth century anti-Semitism was rife, and

pogroms and persecution of Jews were widespread. The Rebbe and his family soon

moved from Nikolayev to Yekaterinoslav, in an attempt to escape from an area

where the some of the more horrific anti-Jewish actions were taking place. As a child

he is said to have dreamt of an end to the troubles and pain that seemed to plague the

people he knew.86

83 Jolkovsky, Binyamin L. ‘The Battle Over the Rebbe Is One for the Books,’ New York Post, Monday 4th of March 1996. 84 Deutsch, Shaul Shimon, Larger than Life: The Life and Times of the Lubavitcher Rebbe, Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson, Volumes 1 and 2. New York: Chasidic Historical Productions, (1997). 85 Yemei Melech, Volume 1, p.107; also Deutsch, Larger Than Life, Volume 1, p. 22. 86 From a written letter by the Rebbe on his 54th birthday in 1956.

57The Rebbe’s father as a role model of a Rebbe

The Rebbe’s father, Reb Levik, is said to have spoken often about the Redemption,

and about Moshiach, a messianic King who would put an end to the suffering of the

Jewish people, and who, it seemed, was their only hope of deliverance. Zvi Harkavi,

one of the Rebbe’s childhood peers, remembers how ‘Reb Levi Yitzchak would

stand at the podium in [the] Kazatzia synagogue on Shavuot and pound the podium

as he spoke of Moshiach’.87 The prevalence of these ideas in the environment in

which the Rebbe grew up triggered, apparently, thoughts and questions in young

Mendel’s mind, and he would often daydream and imagine what Moshiach might be

like, and what divine reward would be able to compensate for such suffering.

Soon after moving to Yekaterinoslav, his father was appointed Chief Rabbi of

the city, since he was able to bridge the schism between the Hasidim and Misnagdim.

He was an impressive figure; a deep Chabad Kabbalist, regal and refined, filled with

life, and with a sense of purpose and mission. He saw himself almost as a Rebbe88 in

his own right, a peer of the Rebbe Rashab, and, although he had respect for the

Rebbe Rashab, he was ultimately not a Chasid or devotee.89 There may have even

been a family rift or feud between these two branches of the Schneerson family,

because the young Mendel was forbidden by his father from visiting the Rebbe

Rashab, or even entering his institutions, and although alive in the lifetime of the

Rebbe Rashab the two never met. This sense of equality that Reb Levik felt towards

the Rebbe Rashab was even more strongly displayed with regard to the Previous

Rebbe, Rabbi Yoseph Yitzchak Schneerson, the Rebbe Rashab’s son. Yoseph

Yitzchak and Menachem Mendel were cousins and virtually of the same age, but

Menachem Mendel was not much liked by the rest of the Chabad fraternity even

though he was a Schneerson.

Reb Levik’s sense of equality may have been fostered by his Hasidic lineage,

since he was the great-grandson of Baruch Sholom, the oldest son of the Tzemach

Tzedek, who might have become the Rebbe of Chabad, if he had so wanted. With the

exception of Reb Hillel Paritch90 and Reb Isaac Homiler,91 Reb Levik was almost

87 Deutsch, Larger Than Life, Volume 1, p. 106. 88 The Rebbe, when referring to his father, used the title ‘Kevod Kedushas’, ‘His Holiness’, a title usually reserved for Rebbes. See also, Larger Than Life, Volume 1, p. 109. 89 Deutsch, Larger Than Life, Volume 1, p. 135. 90 Pelach HaRimmon. Kehot Publication Society New York (1954)

58unique in his independent and controversial habit of delivering Maamorim, a role

that within the Chabad movement is usually performed only by a Rebbe, as the

divine conduit and revealer of the hidden mysteries of the Godhead. The discourses

Reb Levik spoke were not just interesting explorations of Hasidic and Kabbalistic

ideas but were probably sung between the two traditional Hasidic melodies which

frame and are associated with the delivery of such a discourse. Reb Levik may have

seen himself as something of a Rebbe in his own right, and it is quite possible that he

provided a model of what a Rebbe should be to the young Menachem Mendel. It is

an intriguing possibility that the Rebbe’s father may even have harboured messianic

pretensions. Certainly one of the Rebbe’s childhood peers describes him in messianic

terms: ‘To me’, he said, ‘Reb Levik was like Moshiach.’92 Thus there is a chance that

the Rebbe’s father not only provided him with an independent and controversial

model of what a Rebbe should be, but may also have instilled in him the thought that

that role could be messianic.

The Rebbe as a child

Being the child of Reb Levik meant that the Rebbe was fascinated and at times

preoccupied with the ideas of Moshiach and the Redemption. He once stated that

during his childhood messianism was always at the forefront of his young mind:

From the time that I was a child attending cheder, and even before, there began to take form in my mind a picture of the future redemption — the redemption of Israel from its last exile, a redemption such as would explicate the suffering, the decrees and the massacres of galut...93

Like many of the Rebbes of Lubavitch, the Rebbe is depicted as a child prodigy. In

Cheder he was taught separately by Rabbi Schneur Zalman Vilenkin and tutored

extensively by his father at home. Rabbi Yaakov Landau, the former Chief Rabbi of

B’nei Brak, who knew him in his childhood, claims that ‘by the age of seven the

Rebbe already knew all of the Talmud by heart’.94 His parents were said to have

asked his advice, followed his counsel, and treated him with great respect and at

times almost like an adult, which, if true, would be most unusual in the early part of

the twentieth century. One of his peers remembers him ‘as a quiet child. He had a 91 Shney HaMeoros. 92 Deutsch, Larger Than Life, Volume 1, p. 61, and p. 106; also Verdina Shlonsky, ‘The Rebbe in his Youth’, Maariv, March 25, 1977. 93 From a letter written by the Rebbe on his 54th birthday in 1956. 94 Deutsch, Larger Than Life, Volume 1, p. 108.

59high forehead, a serious face and sharp eyes … He was interested in learning about

everything. The adults would always say that he was proficient in many fields…’95

Yet another of his early childhood friends remembers that ‘Mendel was very quiet

and reserved. He was very interested in astronomy. Maps hung on the walls of his

room showing the position of the planets’.96

There are few stories about the Rebbe’s early childhood, and such as there

are, are hard to evaluate. Like many of the tales about the Baal Shem Tov, it is

difficult to decide whether they actually happened at all, or if they have a core of

truth, what it is, or whether they belong to the repertory of mythic tales which get

told about different Rebbes, and which are seen as presaging their future greatness. A

case in point is a story which is recounted also about the Rebbe’s namesake, Rabbi

Menachem Mendel Schneerson, the Tzemach Tzedek (1789-1886). The young

Mendel was competing with his friends to climb a large tree. Eventually he was

found at the top of the tree unable to get down. He was younger and smaller than his

playmates, and when he was eventually helped down, he was asked how he managed

to climb so much higher than any of the other children. He answered that he did not

look down.97

Another story, which is more likely to be accurate, is that at the age of five,

while hiding in a community basement with other Jews, who were fearful that they

would be killed by local Cossacks and hooligans, the Rebbe tried to comfort the

crying children, approaching each scared child individually and telling them that

everything was going to be all right.98 Yet another story states that the Rebbe aged

only nine, single-handedly saved a child from drowning in the Black Sea, while he

and his family were on holiday, and in the process nearly drowned, catching

hypothermia himself. He is said to have suffered from the ill effects later in his life.99

95 Deutsch, Larger Than Life, Volume 1, pp. 57-59. 96 In a letter from Avraham Shlonsky to Zvi Harkavi, 10/02/1973: Yemei HaMelech, Volume 1, p. 144. 97 (Anonymous). Wonders And Miracles: Stories of the Lubavitcher Rebbe, K’far Chabad Israel: Maareches Ufaratzta. (1993) also cited in The Jewish Messiahs, From the Galile to Crown Heights by Harris Lenowitz, New York: Oxford University Press (1988) pp. 218-9. 98 Deutsch, Larger Than Life, Volume 1, p. 31. 99 Deutsch, Larger Than Life, Volume 1, p. 66; also Yochanon, Ber N., Der Yiddishe Heim, Adar

5724, pp. 5-6.

60It seems that the young Mendel was such a bright pupil that, in his very

early teens, he no longer went to school, as his teachers were not sufficiently

proficient to be able to teach him. So he predominately studied at home under the

tutelage of his father. The young Mendel together with his brother Yisroel Aryeh

Leib, or 'Leible', were also tutored together at home in secular subjects by Israel

Eidelsohn Bar Yehuda, the head of the Zionist Youth Movement, as well as by Rabbi

Menachem Emanuel Brustein, and by Dr. Shmaryahu Levin, all extremely secular

and enlightened Jews. Eventually the two Schneerson boys were even tutored by

non-Jewish teachers whose secular expertises were considered more advanced, than

their Jewish contemporaries.

Two different but competitive brothers

The Rebbe and his brother were very competitive. They did almost everything

together, although Mendel seemed the more studious and Leible the more outgoing

and sociable. Deutsch states that ‘the sibling rivalry between the Rebbe and Yisroel

Aryeh Leib … to outsmart one another was tremendous. They challenged each other

and tried constantly to outdo the other in everything. They both competed and

studied hard’.100 As well as being brothers they were, by all accounts, best friends.

They spent many hours at home together, and they both liked to wrestle and fight.

This friendly wrestling was reflected on many levels, including competitiveness in

different areas of study: Torah, the Prophets, Midrash, Talmud, Halacha,

commentaries, Kabbalah, Hasidic philosophy, the Classics, the philosophy of the

Enlightenment, politics, mathematics, the sciences, geography, language, foreign

languages and literature. The sense of friendly competition reportedly lasted into

their late twenties and early thirties, and thus it seems that Leible was the Rebbe’s

main friend and companion for a large part of his early life.

Due to the early influences of family friends and their secular tutoring ‘…the

religious atmosphere of the Schneerson home and the secular atmosphere of the

Shlonsky home [the home of the Schneersons’ secular Jewish neighbours]

merged…’101 and in their late teens both Mendel and Leible had developed their own

100 Deutsch, Larger Than Life, Chapter 7, ‘Brothers on opposite sides of the table’. 101 Deutsch,. Larger Than Life, Volume 1, pp. 52-53 and 61; also Verdina Shlonsky, ‘The Rebbe in his Youth’, Maariv, March 25, 1977.

61particular leanings. Leible was fascinated by secular studies — science,

philosophy and politics, the writings of Herzl and Marx — and found himself

increasingly drawn first towards Zionism and then the Communist movement, and

ultimately away from his religious background. The Rebbe, although able to

sympathise, and perhaps having read many of the same books, for the most part

chose to stay within traditional religious boundaries. At the age of eighteen the

Rebbe went to a non-Lubavitch Yeshiva in Kremenchuk for a year. This was because

his father had strictly forbidden him to go to a Lubavitch Yeshiva.102 The then head

of the Yeshiva, Rabbi Avrohom Yitzchak Zimmerman noted that the Rebbe was a

‘tremendous scholar and extremely devout’.103

When he was twenty-one the Rebbe visited the Previous Rebbe for the first

time, for the sole purpose of investigating whether the Previous Rebbe’s second

oldest daughter would be a good potential match. However, he left without making a

clear decision either way. Later that year, his parents went to negotiate a dowry on

the Rebbe’s behalf, and in particular to secure a promise from Rabbi Yoseph

Yitzchak that their son, Mendel, would eventually inherit leadership of the Chabad-

Lubavitch fraternity.104 It would be four years between the Rebbe’s engagement and

his wedding, and in that time the Rebbe travelled extensively. He also helped in the

running of the Previous Rebbe’s organisations, and became an important part of the

Chabad-Lubavitch ‘apparatus’.

The Rebbe as rebel: Hasidism confronting modernity

In the spring of 1928, aged twenty-six, the Rebbe had already enrolled in the

University of Berlin. Later that same year he married Chana-Musia Schneerson, his

second cousin; the second daughter of Rabbi Yoseph Yitzchak Schneerson. The

Rebbe’s parents were unable to attend the wedding as they had by that time been

arrested and sent to Siberia for their continued practice and promotion of Judaism

within the now Communist Russia. Nevertheless, the wedding, which took place in

Warsaw, was a huge event in the Jewish religious calendar. Guests from almost

every religious denomination participated, and every aspect was invested with

102 Deutsch, Larger Than Life, Volume 1, p. 135. 103 Deutsch, Larger Than Life, Volume 1, p.108. Also see also Sefer Yekaterinoslav, p.122. 104 Deutsch, Larger Than Life, Volume 1, p. 162.

62religious meaning and significance. In contrast, soon after honeymooning in

Riga,105 the young couple moved to Berlin and began a life that seems, at least on the

surface, to run counter to the Rebbe’s upbringing. He ignored his father-in-law’s

unambiguous directives and wishes for him not to continue his studies at university,

and in a provocative move he purposely chose to abandon his Hasidic garb and

instead to wear relatively modern dress. Sholom Ber Gourary, one of the Rebbe’s

cousins, recalls that he ‘walked around Berlin in a beret and a well-tailored suit’.106

He dressed in different coloured Italian suits, with matching berets or cravats, often

with feathers in them. He wore silk ties, leather gloves107 and did not always cover

his head,108 and there are reports that, whilst wearing his gloves, he may have even

have shaken hands with women.

Within a few years the Rebbe’s brother Leible, who was by this time not

particularly observant, also enrolled in the university, and joined the young couple

living in Berlin. Sholom Ber Gourary claims that they frequently enjoyed ‘hiring a

taxi and going out together… on Monday nights’.109 For the entire period whilst in

Berlin (and later at the Sorbonne in Paris), the Rebbe generally did not wear a

Kapota (the traditional long black Hasidic garment) either on Shabbat or high

holidays.110 Despite this apparent rejection of his religious dress code, the Rebbe

seems always to have kept his beard. Nonetheless, it does seem that he attempted to

pass himself off as cosmopolitan and culturally informed. His nephew commented:

‘during my stay in Berlin, I remember observing that my uncle was an avid reader of

newspapers. He would read many daily newspapers. He was very interested in

politics. He was also fascinated with military strategy. This was one of the areas that

was always of interest to him’.111 He liked to read science journals and attempted to

keep abreast of new developments, showing interest in different trends in

psychology, poetry and literature. This was definitely not the conduct expected of a

new son-in-law of a Hasidic Rebbe, or the eventual heir to the leadership of Chabad.

105 Deutsch, Larger Than Life, Volume 2, p. 277. 106 Deutsch, Larger Than Life, Volume 2, p. 134. 107 Deutsch, Larger Than Life, Volume 2, p. 236. 108 Deutsch, Larger Than Life, Volume 2, p. 204 and p. 288. 109 Deutsch, Larger Than Life, Volume 2, p. 134. 110 Deutsch, Larger Than Life, Volume 2, p. 218. 111 Deutsch, Larger Than Life, Volume 2, p. 133.

63One can imagine the controversy such behaviour must have engendered.

His parents insist that one of the main conditions of him marrying the Previous

Rebbe’s daughter was that he becomes heir to the Chabad-Lubavitch dynasty.112

Then once the young couple are engaged to be married, he promptly enrols in one of

the leading, culturally enlightened, cosmopolitan and secular universities. Between

1928-1933 Berlin was regarded as one of the most culturally rich and

quintessentially bohemian cities in the world, the hub of one the most creative

periods of the twentieth century.113 Menachem Mendel enrolled on a course called

the ‘Natural Sciences’, which from a traditionally Jewish perspective sounds

innocent enough, and hardly likely to pose a challenge or a threat to traditional

Jewish observance and identity. The course title misleadingly conjures up images of

the study of mathematics, physics, chemistry and biology. In fact it was a course

mainly in philosophy, both classical and contemporary, although the exact sciences

did play a secondary role in the curriculum.

Ironically it is quite possible that a condition of the dowry forced the Previous

Rebbe to support the Rebbe financially during his university career, because the

dowry had not specified what area of study the Rebbe would undertake. It has been

suggested114 that the Previous Rebbe at the time was furious, and spoke openly

against young people going to university, claiming that it would weaken their loyalty

to Judaism. Deutsch, who reports the following story in the name of Rabbi Yechiel

Yaakov Weinberg, then head of the Hildesheimer Seminary, supports this:

He came in and I asked his name. He said, ‘Mendel Schneerson’. I said, ‘I am surprised that your future father-in-law agrees to your going to college’. The Rebbe responded, ‘How do you know he agrees?’ ‘Then how else do you have money to go to college?’ I said. The Rebbe answered, ‘Auf a massah fregt men nit keine kashes’ (About an event, you don’t ask questions).’115

Whilst at university Mendel desperately struggled to find the manifestation of the

eternal truths of the Torah in secular philosophy, and in the laws of physics and the

other sciences. Although his early attempts to reconcile science and Judaism strike

112 Deutsch, Larger Than Life, Volume 1. 113 Grunfeld, Frederic V., Prophets without Honour: Background to Freud, Kafka, Einstein and their World. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, (1979). 114 Deutsch, Larger Than Life, Volume 2, pp. 74-77 and p. 269. 115 Deutsch, Larger Than Life, Volume 2, p. 75. The translation of the Yiddish does not seem to catch the meaning. The sense appears to be that something like, ‘There’s no use crying over spilt milk’. He had presented the Rebbe with a fait accompli, and there was little he could do about it.

64one now as somewhat naïve (see the example of Pascal’s law below), the young

Mendel does seem to have made a serious attempt to find the truths of his own

religious heritage within the apparently alien and hostile world of modernity. The

picture that emerges of him is of a rather arrogant, aloof young man, a decided non-

conformist. He was seen as a bit of a rebel, at times flippant and selectively

enthusiastic, often finding his university studies unchallenging. He read newspapers

at the back of the lecture theatres — although some say that all the while he was

actually learning a section of Talmud inserted in the middle! He would occasionally

show off his superior intellect. There is a folk story that he was observed reading a

newspaper during a compulsory exam. When he was reminded by the invigilator to

complete the paper, the Rebbe is said to have finished it so quickly that when he

handed it to him, the invigilator assumed that he was joking and promptly put it in

the bin. The Rebbe then suggested that he take a look at it. The invigilator was

shocked to find that all the answers were correct!

However, despite such extravagant displays of insubordination there are

fragments of notes116 that the Rebbe made while at university that tell of a young

man clearly struggling to reconcile the holy and the secular, a man with an almost

unquenchable thirst for knowledge, fascinated by mathematics, logic, and science, as

well as by his own religion, and perhaps those of others, with a deep love for almost

anything literary, and an appreciation of the arts. The following is an example from

this period of his life of the Rebbe’s attempts to reconcile science and Judaism:

Pascal’s law regarding liquid: applied pressure to a confined liquid…The Torah is compared to water, wine, milk, oil, honey, dew, and blood (seven liquids). [The nature of these seven liquids applies also to Torah, which is compared to liquids.] The contained environment of Torah (compared to confined fluid) is here in this world. It is in this physical confined environment that the laws of Torah take hold. Thus, the confined environment and pressure causes increasing height in the barometer, in this case translating to mean the rise in the level of the soul through fulfilling the commandments of the Torah in this world (confined environment). The barometer is compared to Torah. The lower part of the barometer is like the Torah as it is in this physical world. The higher level of the barometer is like the Torah in a higher spiritual world: Torah in the world of Atzilus, Briah, Yetzirah and Assiah. The level that one can achieve is dependent on the amount of liquid there is, meaning the amount of abilities that each person has. Therefore our sages teach us that he who has the ability to be devoted to

116 Reshimos, Issue No.3, p. 44.

65Torah, and doesn’t will die young. Whereas someone who is less fortunate and has less capabilities, for him it is enough to recite the Shema and he has fulfilled his obligation of learning Torah. This emphasizes that the amount of potential (the liquid) that each person has is what is important to be fulfilled. If each person fulfils his potential, then all souls are equal, since there is one Father for all of us. It is for this reason that each individual could ask of himself ‘when will my actions reach the level of the actions of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob’? … The external applied pressure transmits uniformity in all directions. This is evident with an enclosed utensil. This is also an allegory for a man filled with Torah: if he is careful in his observance of easy as well as difficult commandments, there is nothing that is beneath his dignity if is obligated to do it. The actions of the truly pious person are similar on all occasions’.117

Compared to some of the Rebbe’s later attempts to fuse science and Torah ideas, this

example seems a little forced. One gets the feeling from reading this text that it is

almost as if he is grabbing at straws trying to make sense of this basic law of physics

according to his understanding of Judaism. What it really tells us is that in the early

years of his university education there would have been core subjects and ideas to

which he would inevitably have been exposed. These would have been filtered

through his traditional Jewish and Hasidic psychological defence mechanisms and

either rejected outright, or translated into a lesson in Jewish ethics or Kabbalah (as in

the above example), and new meaning given which was not originally intended.

Other ideas would have been voluntarily explored, welcomed and absorbed

into his philosophy. It might be argued that he endeavoured to transform the secular

world around him not by challenging it, but by seeing it differently. He tried to view

the world and the ideas to which he was exposed as manifestations of divine wisdom,

and thus to see Godliness as innate in everything. This belief perhaps enabled him to

participate and function more fully in the world. However, a few years of exposure to

so much secular wisdom must have subtly but profoundly changed his outlook,

whether he was aware of it or not.

Notwithstanding his open-minded attitude to the study of secular subjects the

Rebbe’s sense of defiance and his sense of Jewish identity seemed never to have

wavered. There is a story from this period of his life that expresses something

interesting about him, and shows both his fearlessness and his Jewish pride. In 1932,

when he was still in Berlin and the Nazis were gaining in popularity and power, the

117 Translation by Deutsch, Larger Than Life, Volume 2, pp. 176-177.

66police were taking details of the different residents in the apartment block where

the Rebbe was living. One of his neighbours described the Rebbe as being ‘Russian

Orthodox’, which was not all that far from the truth: he was indeed ‘Russian’ and he

was ‘Orthodox’; however he was Orthodox Jewish and not Christian. When the

Rebbe heard of how his neighbour had cleverly concealed his identity, he was

horrified and promptly visited the police station to inform them of the mistake, and to

make clear that he was, in fact, a Russian Orthodox Jew.

The university years — a holy façade?

Very soon after this event the Rebbe transferred to the Sorbonne where he

specialised in mathematics and engineering. He continued his studies in Paris for

approximately five years. He is said to have persisted in adopting modern dress, and

there are even reports that he was accustomed to wear a toupé.118 The Rebbe spent

approximately ten years in a university environment, far in excess of the time needed

to complete a single degree. While living in Paris he may have taken a more active

role in the local Jewish community than is commonly supposed (he is said

occasionally to have taught Talmud in a local Jewish community centre), but the

dissonance between his outward persona, on one hand and his religious upbringing

and apparent destiny, on the other, is both striking and puzzling. There are two ways

of interpreting it. The first is to take it at face value as a case of youthful rebellion.

This may be an attractively obvious explanation. Youthful rebellion is hardly an

unusual phenomenon. There are, however, all sorts of hints that it may be too

simplistic, and that something more subtle and complex was going on, namely that

the Rebbe was playing out a role. He was going through a period of concealment in

which his true destiny as a ‘saint’ or ‘holy man’ was deliberately hidden. He erected

a ‘façade’ behind which he hid. He was working out in a very elaborate and literal

way the principle, ‘“Always (to the world) a man should have fear of Heaven in

secret” — To the world you should appear as an ordinary man and your piety should

be in secret’ (Siach Sarfei Kodesh I, 11).

There were obvious models for such behaviour in Hasidic tradition. The

Rebbe could have been following the example of the Baal Shem Tov, who is said to

118 From a conversation with a French Yeshiva Student, who asked not to be named, and who said that in France this was ‘common knowledge’ (Manchester 2002).

67have had a period of ‘hiding and concealment’, as it were, when he appeared to be

no more than an ignorant peasant.119 The Rebbe’s enrolment at university, his

‘disguise’ as a culturally enlightened individual, may have been intended to conceal

his rabbinical and Hasidic genius, and allow him to develop relatively undisturbed.

Moreover, if he was ultimately to fulfil his destiny of transforming the world, it was

important that he should know it at first hand. This is, of course, the line that

apologists of the Rebbe take within the movement to explain the ‘strange acts’ of his

Berlin and Paris years, but it is possible that they may in this case be not too far from

the truth. The Rebbe was always a role-player, with a flair for self-dramatisation. His

‘rebellion’ was actually very mild, and as we have seen never involved a serious

denial of his Judaism, or of his Jewish identity. And he returned to the fold, so to

speak, with remarkable ease and speed. Whatever the explanation for his behaviour

there were always, it seems, two Rebbes, a public and a private persona, a revealed

and a secret one. This is, perhaps, true of most people, but it is probable that this

dichotomy was particularly pronounced in the Rebbe’s case. He had a deeply

mystical personality of a certain type. He constantly struggled on the one hand to

escape the limitations of his religion, and on the other to remain within them, and

even to encourage others to re-embrace them. What is intriguing in his case,

however, is that he did not outwardly ‘conform’ but inwardly ‘rebel’ — the more

common pattern. Rather, he inwardly ‘conformed’ but outwardly ‘rebelled’, which

rather supports the notion that he was playing a strange ‘game’. This schism between

inner and outer identities, this façade, was maintained for more than ten years while

the Rebbe was in university, both in Berlin and at the Sorbonne.

In 1938 the Rebbe escaped the invading German army, and eventually moved

to Lisbon and lived there for close to a year. In 1940, because of pressure on the

American government to ensure that the Previous Rebbe and his family escape from

the Warsaw Ghetto, he and his wife eventually managed to secure passage to the

United States. Almost as soon as the Rebbe moved to America he abandoned his

toupé, and no longer shook hands with women and eventually began to wear his

Kapota on Shabbat and High Holidays. And in the ten years between 1940 and 1950

he increasingly appeared to be not only a religious individual but also a scholarly,

119 Challenge: An encounter with Lubavitch-Chabad. London: Lubavitch Foundation (1970), pp.5-9. Whether or not this was actually true of the Besht does not invalidate my point, which is that the Rebbe would have known the tradition that he only masqueraded as a peasant to conceal his true identity.

68devout and pious one. Nonetheless, despite the Rebbe being the son-in-law of the

Lubavitcher Rebbe, he, in comparison to the other son-in-law Rabbi Gourary,

refrained from taking a more active role in the Chabad-Lubavitch movement. For

many years he was employed as an engineer at the Brooklyn Naval Dock Yard, and

is said to have designed and patented parts for U.S submarines, details of which are

still, apparently, ‘classified’.120

The Rebbe becomes Rebbe: His reorganisation of Chabad

In 1950 the Previous Rebbe, Rabbi Yoseph Yitzchak Schneersohn passed away and

almost exactly one year later Menachem Mendel, after much political infighting,

grudgingly accepted the role of Rebbe of the Lubavitch movement.121 Under his

leadership this relatively small Hasidic group was radically transformed. People

became visibly more religious. The Rebbe established a youth movement, a women’s

movement, and a network of emissaries throughout the world, who took his message

to unaffiliated Jews and eventually even to non-Jews. Leissner accurately sums up

his achievement as follows:

Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson single-handedly transformed Habad from a small, relatively unknown group of Jews into an internationally recognized and respected religious group with tens of thousands of devotees and ties to over a million other people. At this time, Habad is the fastest growing Jewish religious group with adherents all over the world and representatives on every inhabited continent. The Rebbe is attributed with this growth both due to his amazing charisma and ability to utilize a modern and technological world.122

In the marketplace of religions Chabad-Lubavitch proved to be the most engaging,

dynamic and intellectually stimulating type of Judaism on offer. Through its

expanding outreach work on university campuses, through its network of

representatives in almost all the major cities of the world, the Rebbe’s religious

philosophy of Judaism was spread, till it became, the dominant Jewish ideology,

accepted by many as the norm of what they now understand ‘Judaism’ to be. One is

120 There are also rumours that he was consulted about the design of the Verrazano-Narrows, Staten Island, Suspension Bridge, but I have been unable to substantiate these claims. 121 Ehrlich, Avrum M. Leadership in the Habad Movement: A Critical Evaluation of Habad Leadership, History, and Succession. New York: Jason Aronson (2000). 122 Quoted from a Chabad publicity video by Richard P. Leissner in his dissertation, Messianic Movements, available at http://www.xlubi.com/x5lessi.htm (26/12/2002).

69reminded of the spread of Lurianic Kabbalah in the sixteenth century. The reason

for the success of the movement within the secular Jewish world has largely been

due to two factors. The first is the romanticising of Hasidism and the reawakening of

interest in Jewish mysticism, and its re-establishment at the heart of the history of

Judaism. The latter was brought about partially by the work of Gershom Scholem,

who successfully challenged the marginalization of mysticism within Judaism by

Heinrich Graetz and other rationalists of the Wissenschaft des Judentums School.

The former was largely a result of the advocacy of Martin Buber. Buber, more than

anyone else, caught the imagination of many non-practicing Jews by depicting

Hasidism as a kind of folksy Jewish existentialism. Buber’s romantic fantasy of an

enlightened Hasidic existentialism has become, in the eyes of many, embodied in the

modern-day Lubavitchers in America, who, although often dressed in traditional

Hasidic garb, espouse the Rebbe’s own form of Hasidic existentialism. Secondly, the

Lubavitchers are enthusiastic and expert marketers of their philosophy, and can at

times be ruthless and clever manipulators of the media. They are, on the whole, very

good at adapting their message to a particular fashion, or trimming it to a particular

audience. But they are also extremely earnest and sincere, and remain true to their

beliefs and cause. This makes them modern yet orthodox, dynamic yet traditional,

exciting yet thoughtful. Likewise although the Rebbe was a mystic attempting to

trigger a spiritual and existential awakening, he was also a politician and statesman.

This laid the groundwork for the movement becoming extremely influential within

the international political arena, in the United States, United Kingdom,123 South

America, Israel, and the former USSR.124

Within the traditional Orthodox Jewish world, the story is slightly different,

but in the long run Lubavitch has proved just as affective there. Although the

distinctive customs and beliefs of Chabad have, on the whole, been rejected, many of

the intellectual heads of the non-Lubavitch Yeshivas and the leaders of the Haredi

communities, privately learn and have been deeply influenced by the Rebbe’s

teachings, and his general approach to many Jewish issues. Thus there has been a

steady offensive mounted by Chabad within the Orthodox Jewish world, as well as

outside of it among rank-and-file secular Jews, some of whom eventually end up

123 On the influence of Chabad on the Chief Rabbi of Great Britain, see Chapter 1. 124 See: Berger, David. The Rebbe The Messiah and the Scandal of Orthodox Indifference London: The Littman Library of Jewish Civilization, (2001). pp. 117-133.

70rejoining the Orthodox Jewish world, bringing with them ideas they have acquired

through exposure to Chabad. The mechanisms for a slow and gradual but radical

transformation of Judaism, its ‘Chabadification’, have been put in place. These

changes may never become visible in the adoption of the outward garb and customs

of the Lubavitch movement. It is always hard to measure the degree of change that

takes place through the dissemination and absorption of ideas. It is often manifested

in subtle changes of attitude and emphasis. But at the present juncture of Jewish

history it requires no gift of prophecy to predict that Chabad is likely to play a key

role in the survival and development of Judaism. Judaism in the future is likely to

speak with a noticeable Chabad accent.

The Rebbe’s death and the question of succession

On the 27th of Adar 1992, the Rebbe, aged ninety-two, suffered his first stroke, which

virtually paralysed him. Nonetheless he is said to have remained fully compos

mentis, and on occasions was able to gather the strength to speak to his secretariat.

He even continued to answer questions and give advice as best he could. Over the

next two years the Rebbe spent much of his life in and out of hospitals (mainly in),

and his Hasidim were rarely allowed to see him. During these two years, when the

Rebbe was for the most part unable to speak, emotions ran high and local politics and

factional infighting took over Crown Heights and the broader Lubavitch community.

His followers did not know how to cope with a less-than-vigorous Rebbe. Most

people said psalms for his miraculous recovery. With every deterioration in his

condition the Yeshiva students were directed to recite more Psalms and to increase

the level of their already ultra-orthodox observance. Based on the Rebbe’s own

lectures, it was even believed by many that he would not ever actually die.125

Over these final two years the Rebbe suffered several minor heart attacks,

organ failures, and a whole list of other complications, as well as a second major

stroke, also on the 27th of Adar 1994, exactly two years after the first one, which

some within the movement saw as a cosmic sign. All of this only helped to fuel the

messianic frenzy that had gripped the movement. The Rebbe was seen as fulfilling

the messianic prophecy of Isaiah 53, ‘suffering’ through illness, and with each

125 Schneerson. M.M. Sefer Hisvadiyos, 22nd Shevat 5748: ‘there will be no hefsek, between this generation and the redemption’.

71passing day the messianic expectancy and urgency increased. On June 12th 1994,

equivalent to the Hebrew date of the 3rd Tammuz 5754, while in hospital in

Manhattan, the Rebbe suffered a fatal heart attack from which he never recovered.

His body was taken to his headquarters that night. The news broke and travelled by

radio, telephone and word of mouth throughout the Jewish world. The reactions

amongst the Chabad-Lubavitch fraternity were mixed. Many were not informed

whether the Rebbe had passed away, or had miraculously recovered, and returned to

his headquarters.

At about 7.00 am, that morning, outside the entrance of the Lubavitch

headquarters, 770 Eastern Parkway, Hasidic music blared festively from the side of a

van, which served fruit salad, beer and vodka. In front of it was a circle of dancing

Yeshiva students, chanting the mantra Yechi Adonainoo. However, at approximately

8.00 am the public was allowed to see the Rebbe’s covered body. Men and women

came out of the entrance to 770 in tears. The small circle of dancing students began

to realise that what had happened might have not been the Rebbe’s miraculous

recovery but his passing. With this realisation, the ‘Yechi…’ chant changed. At first

it was a celebration of the Rebbe’s new messianic leadership, that was about to be

revealed to the world, but with time it came to express something different. It

became a prayer that the Rebbe would be resurrected at any moment, perhaps even

magically brought back to life by the very singing. The chant in a sense claimed that

despite what people might think had happened, true believers knew that the Rebbe

was still the potential Moshiach and that he would lead the world out of Exile and

into the Redemption.126

With the Rebbe’s passing the division between the pro-messianic and anti-

messianic camps came to the surface, and from that day on Chabad-Lubavitch has

been irreconcilably split almost in half, between those for and those against

continuing to declare the Rebbe’s messianic candidacy. The anti-messianic camp

claimed that the Rebbe had never actually said he was the Messiah and that the entire

messianic episode was due to a misunderstanding by his more fanatical followers.

They argue that the Rebbe disassociated himself from being called Moshiach, and if

this applied before his death, how much more so after his passing. Not only was it

126 I am reporting here largely what I witnessed at first hand.

72wrong to continue to claim that the Rebbe was the Messiah, but it was heresy, and

would ultimately damage the name of Lubavitch, alienate people from the

movement, and tarnish the Rebbe’s memory. In the messianic camp, belief in the

Rebbe’s messiahship continued to be embraced. Some claimed that the Rebbe had

not actually died, but, just as Satan had fooled the Jewish people into believing that

Moses had died on Mount Sinai, so too the Rebbe’s death was only an illusion to test

their faith, and that the Rebbe continued to live as usual. However, we were not

privileged actually to see him. Others believed that the death was real, but that the

Rebbe would be resurrected at any moment, and bring about the actual

Redemption.127 Others were of the opinion that the Redemption had already begun.

The Rebbe’s passing also raised theological questions that needed answers. One of

these was posed as follows: if the Rebbe was the Zaddik, and there always has to be a

Zaddik to uphold the world, through whose merit the world exists, how can the world

endure after the Rebbe’s passing? Was there indeed another Zaddik who was

upholding up the world, or had the world in some way, actually ceased to exist?

Some were eventually to claim that the Rebbe’s passing made him one with God,

who was everywhere and in all places and able to answer prayer.

The following years, down to the present, have been marked by the kind of

political infighting that marred the two years before the Rebbe’s passing. For many

within the movement those struggles, revealed the disreputable state of almost all the

Rabbis within the Lubavitch hierarchy, and virtually none of the leadership escaped

untarnished by the struggle for power and by each other’s ruthless desire to impose

what they believed to be right. The Rebbe did little to plan and prepare for the

continuation of his movement after his passing, through appointing or alluding to a

successor. He left no heir apparent. On the contrary, a few years before his death he

set about to undermine and dismantle the hierarchy of his own movement through his

teachings.

One thing became clear: the love and the loyalty of the Lubavitch movement

was directed toward the Rebbe alone, and no one, no matter how saintly, could

replace him. Rabbi M.M. Schneerson was probably the last Rebbe of the Chabad-

Lubavitch dynasty. Whether sufficient of his teaching and his persona survives to

127 For a brief but detailed account of the history of the recent messianic resurgence see: http://www.moshiachlisten.com/history.html (16th Jan 2006).

73allow Chabad to continue; like Bratzlav, without a living Rebbe, only time will

tell. For the present, and the foreseeable future, both camps within the movement

hold that if he is to ever be replaced it will only be by his own resurrected self, in the

moments just before the heavenly descent of the Jerusalem Temple, in the true and

complete Redemption.

Since the Rebbe’s passing the Lubavitch movement, both the messianic and

the publicly anti-messianic wings, has continued to grow in its political influence and

educational outreach programs. However, like an organic life form, cells die off and

others grow, people leave and people join, but overall Chabad-Lubavitch having

gained momentum is probably expanding as fast, if not slightly faster, than when the

Rebbe was alive. The movement, though divided by political and financial

infighting, still manages to exercise a profound influence on a vast proportion of

world Jewry.

74

PART TWO

THE MESSIANIC DOCTRINE

This second section will explore the nature of the Rebbe’s messianic theology itself

and mainly focus on the doctrine of Atzmus and the doctrine of the New Messianic

Torah. En route and as a way of an introduction I will briefly examine the sources of

the Rebbe’s messianism, which is rooted in a spiritualized and Beshtian

interpretation of the messianism of Maimonides. As well expounding the Rebbe’s

view of the nature of the messianic landscape, I will also survey the direct evidence

that Rebbe did regard himself as Messiah both potential and actual. Having explored

the role and the identity of the Messiah in the Rebbe’s thought, which includes the

Messiah’s role as teacher and theologian, I will attempt to set out in more or less

linear and propositional form the Rebbe’s complex paradoxical Messianic theology

of Atzmus, which is understood to be the ultimate, transforming revelation of the

Essence of God in the messianic era. After this I will offer an exposition of the

Rebbe’s doctrine of the New Torah, arguing that the heart of this New Torah is the

Rebbe’s own doctrine of Atzmus. The exposition takes the form of a commentary on

a particular discourse on the New Torah, the full text of which is given in Appendix

1.

75

Chapter 5

The Messianic Scenario

— The Rebbe, Maimonides and the Baal Shem Tov

Before turning to the Rebbe’s own messianic status and messianic theology it will

be useful to look at the traditional sources, which influenced his messianic thinking.

Jewish messianism, as Moshe Idel has rightly stressed in his monograph Messianic

Mystics,128 is a highly diverse phenomenon, more complex than Gershom Scholem

was prepared to allow (see Chapters 9 and 10). There is a vast array of traditional

Jewish messianic literature, which proposes many different models of the Messiah

and many different scenarios of the eschaton. Interestingly, the Rebbe chose as his

starting point not some of the more mystically orientated traditions, such as we find

in the Zohar or Abraham Abulafia, but rather the very this-worldly, political ideas of

Maimonides. Maimonides’ Hilkhot Melakhim 11:4 is the key text that sets the tone

and establishes the framework for the Rebbe’s conception of the person and the role

of the Messiah and of the unfolding of the messianic era as a whole. Maimonides

states:

If a King should arise from the house of David, who delves deeply into Torah and who is occupied with mitzvot like David his father, in accordance with the Written and the Oral Torah, and who forces all Israel to follow it, and to strengthen its weaknesses, and who battles in the wars of God – behold, as for this [person], it is presumed that he is Moshiach. If he does so and is successful, and is victorious over all the nations that surround him, and builds [the] Sanctuary in its place, and gathers the dispersed of Israel – behold this [person] is definitely Moshiach, and [he will] rectify the entire world to serve God together, as it says: ‘Then all the peoples will be transformed to speak purely, so all of them may call out in the name of God, and to serve him as one’ (Zephaniah 3:9).

The Rebbe’s interpretation of Maimonides points out that it’s possible to postulate

two main phases in the disclosure of the Messiah firstly the potential messiah

(b’cheskas Moshiach) and secondly the actual messiah (Moshiach Vadai). These

correspond to two main phases in the unfolding of the messianic era itself namely

128 Idel, Moshe. Messianic Mystics New Haven and London: Yale University Press (1998). pp. 3-27

76Yemos HaMoshiach and Binyan Beis HaMikdosh.129 He then argues that with a

closer reading it is also possible to add two more stages to Maimonides’ view of the

eschaton and therefore four ultimate stages in all:

� The era of the presumed/potential Messiah, or Yemos HaMoshiach, marked

by a heightened observance of the Torah and the fighting of the Wars of God;

� The era of the actual Messiah, marked by the building of the Temple [Binyan

Beis HaMikdosh];

� The perfecting or rectification of the world [Tacken es HaOlam]; and

� The resurrection of the dead [Techias HaMesim]. Maimonides does not

actually mention this here, but he believed in it, and it can only fit into his

scenario here at the end.

In the first stage, the era of the ‘presumed Messiah’, the world will not be

radically changed. The only real difference between the world before and after the

inception of this stage will be the presence in it of a potential and ‘presumed’

messianic candidate. This candidate must have the following qualities:

� He must be a King;

� He must be of Davidic lineage;

� He must be a scholarly and observant Jew;

� He must encourage his fellow Jews to strengthen their flagging observance of

the Torah;

� He must battle in ‘the wars of God’.

The Rebbe highlights a problem here often ignored by commentators, both

within the Chabad-Lubavitch movement and within mainstream Judaism, namely the

Halachic puzzle in Maimonides’ use of the word ‘king’. A Halachic king can only

be confirmed in office by an official Sanhedrin, but, according to most accounts of

the end-time, the official Sanhedrin will only be reconstituted after the Temple is

rebuilt, which Maimonides relegates to a later stage in the process. There are a

number of ways of resolving this paradox. Either Maimonides believes, contrary to

129 Ravitzky, Aviezer, Messianism, Zionism, and Jewish Religious Radicalism. Translated by Michael Swirsky and Jonathan Chipman. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Chicago Studies in the History of Judaism. (1996), pp. 1-10.

77tradition, that a Sanhedrin will be established130 at the outset, in order to recognize

and appoint as king the messianic candidate, or he does not refer here to an actual

Halachic king, but, the Rebbe argues, he is speaking metaphorically of a Torah

scholar, on the basis of the Talmudic dictum that all ‘Rabbis are considered kings’,131

or he is referring loosely to an individual who exercises kingly authority, or who,

perhaps, simply possesses regal qualities.132

This messianic candidate has to be of Davidic lineage,133 a descendant of

Solomon134 and from the tribe of Judah. He must delve deeply into the Torah and be

occupied with mitzvoth like David his forefather, ‘in accordance with the Written

Torah and the Oral’. The reason why Maimonides stipulates that any potential

messianic candidate must be seen to be delving into Torah and occupied with

mitzvoth is because the traditional vision of the messianic era is of a time when the

observance of the Torah and its commandments will be carried out in the most

complete way. This will necessitate the rebuilding of the Temple, because many of

the commandments of the Torah are concerned with Temple sacrifices. It is

inconceivable that any valid messianic candidate would behave in a manner that

would contradict this idea, on which the ultimate fulfilment of the Torah depends. As

Maimonides explains in Hilkhot Melakhim 11:1, ‘Then in his days all of the statutes

will be re-instituted as in previous times. We will offer sacrifices and observe the

sabbatical year and the Jubilee according to the particulars explained in Torah’. Thus

it is not only necessary that he delves into the Torah and practices its

commandments; it is also necessary that he does so in accordance with the accepted

norms of traditional Judaism. This is implied by the addition of words ‘Written and

Oral Torah’, which also, by the way, excludes anyone, such as a Karaite who rejects

the Oral Torah, from meeting the qualifications to be a potential Messiah.

The implication appears to be that it is the complete observance of the whole

Torah that is the primary goal of the messianic age, and the rest follows from this. It

is by restoring the Jewish monarchy, rebuilding the Temple, and gathering in the

130 Isaiah 1:26. 131 Talmud Gittin 62a Also, Talmud Nedarim 20b, ‘Who are the ‘Ministering Angels? The Rabbis.’ 132 Sefer HaSichos 5752, Volume 1, pp. 320-321, ‘Minay Melech’. Also, Sefer HaSichos 5751 Parshas Shoftim Volume 1, p.791. 133 Isaiah 11:1. 134 1 Chron. 22:8-10.

78exiles135 that the Moshiach will make possible the complete observance of Torah

and its mitzvoth. The ultimate purpose of the messianic era is not to re-establish the

Davidic monarchy and the Temple, and to gather in the exiles, but to restore the

observance of the Torah itself, and give the Jewish people the chance to implement

all its commandments in full. The monarchy, the Temple and the ingathering of the

exiles are only a means to this end. This view is clearly supported by Maimonides

when he says: ‘He will rebuild the [Beis Ha]Mikdosh (Temple) and gather in the

dispersed remnant of Israel. Then, in his days, all the statutes will be re-instituted as

in former times. We will offer sacrifices and observe the sabbatical year and the

Jubilee according to all their particulars as set forth in the Torah.’136 The Messiah

will thus promote a full and strict observance of all aspects of the Torah and its

commandments as part of his programme of ‘compelling all Israel’, as the following

comment makes clear:

[He will] restore the observance of the Torah and the mitzvos to its complete state. All the elements of Torah observance which were lacking in exile – because the entire Jewish people did not live in Eretz Yisrael and because the Beis HaMikdosh was destroyed – will be renewed.137

This idea fits in well with the Hasidic concept of Hiddur Mitzvah, the beautification

of the mitzvoth. The designation ‘Hasid’ has long been used in the Jewish ethical

tradition (Musar) to denote ‘someone who goes beyond the strict letter of the law’.

He is scrupulous to perform the mitzvoth to their utmost specification — and even

beyond. From a Hasidic perspective, the Messiah will be someone who will do the

same, that is to say he will perform the Torah and its commandments completely,

and encourage (compel) others to do likewise. The desire on his part for a closer

communion with God through his Torah and commandments will find ultimate

expression in his empowering of the Jewish people to observe fully the entire Torah,

with all of its stipulations, by re-building the Temple and gathering in the exiles to

the Land of Israel, where they can at last fulfil all the ‘commandments pertaining to

the Land.’ Maimonides could not be further from antinomianism, or from the idea

that there will be a new Torah in the messianic age. The Torah that will be fully

restored in the messianic age will be the Torah that we already know, the Torah

135 Isaiah 11:12. 136 Maimonides, Hilchot Melachim 11:1. 137 Schneerson, M.M., I Await His Coming Every Day. New York: Kehot Publication Society. (1991), attributed to the Rebbe.

79given at Sinai. Maimonides would utterly disqualify as potential Messiah anyone

who would advocate the abrogation of any of the mitzvoth, since this would negate

the whole point of the messianic project.

The potential Messiah will ‘force all Israel to follow [the Torah], and to

strengthen its weakness’. He must enforce traditional Jewish practice amongst the

Jewish people, in the same way as Ezra and the other leaders of the first return to

Israel from Babylonia in the Persian period. This begins to define the messianic

candidate in a pragmatic and public way. He cannot be a figure ‘unknown to us’, or

waiting in a cave for some sign before dramatically revealing himself. Rather he will

be a recognized religious leader, who will play a very public role and influence the

entire Jewish people.

The potential Messiah will ‘battle in the wars of God’. The reference here is

to the traditional vision of the warrior Messiah, but the Rebbe in his interpretation

shies any from any apocalyptic interpretation of ‘the wars of God’, despite the fact

that Maimonides seems to imply that they are literal wars when he speaks later of the

Messiah as being ‘victorious over all the nations that surround him’. Rather he

understands the wars as referring to a spiritual struggle for the souls of the Jewish

people and for the dissemination of the knowledge of God, which he regards as being

taught in its purest form by Hasidism. He argues that the context of the expression

‘the wars of God’ suggests this spiritual interpretation because it comes as a logical

extension of the Messiah’s spiritual activities of delving into Torah, and forcing

Israel into greater observance of the mitzvoth. The potential Messiah will be someone

who engages in an ‘evangelical’ campaign to force the Jewish people to become

more observant, and to spread the knowledge and revelation of God throughout the

world. The wars are ‘wars of God’, not wars fought by the Jewish people against

their enemies. They are metaphorical. The Rebbe even saw the war against Amalek,

which according to the Midrash will take place at the start of the Messianic era, as

primarily a spiritual battle.

This characterizes the first major phase of the messianic disclosure. The

second stage is characterized by the rebuilding of the Temple, the Binyan [Beis

Ha]Mikdosh. This is the crucial act, which transforms the potential Messiah into the

actual Messiah. The conditions which the actual Messiah must fulfil are:

80

� He must continue to manifest the qualities of Torah observance that

characterized the potential Messiah;

� He must be successful in what he undertakes;

� He must be victorious over all the nations that surround him;

� He must build the Sanctuary ‘in its place’;

� He must gather in the dispersed of Israel.

Anyone who fulfils all these conditions is confirmed as the actual Messiah, and when

he appears the second phase of the Messianic era will have begun.

The Rebbe, reasonably, understands Maimonides as implying that the marks

of the actual Messiah are additional to those of the potential Messiah. They are not

meant to replace them. The actual Messiah must continue to demonstrate both

scholarly and practical commitment to traditional Judaism, and he must raise the

level of observance of the Jewish people. And, if we are to accept the Rebbe’s

spiritualization of the ‘wars of God’, then he must continue to pursue his

‘evangelistic’ activities, and to instil in Israel a greater fidelity to Torah. Success is a

sign of his true messiahship. That success, at least as it relates to ‘the wars of God’,

is defined by Maimonides in concrete terms as victory over the enemies of Israel. As

we noted the Rebbe was not happy with taking ‘the wars of God’ in a concrete,

political sense, and significantly the words ‘and is victorious over all the nations that

surround him’ are omitted from most official Lubavitch translations of Maimonides.

If we carry through the spiritualising interpretation of this statement, we face an

obvious practical problem of deciding how and when we will know that the Messiah

has been victorious in a spiritual war. What will the outward, visible signs be? The

Rebbe did, however, take the conflict as spiritual throughout. There are several

indications of this. He clearly saw himself as the commander of a spiritual army that

was fighting ‘the wars of God’. One of the most famous of the Lubavitch songs, sung

to and about the Rebbe, includes the words ‘nation after nation we are

conquering…we will win this war’, in reference to the spiritual impact that the

Rebbe’s emissaries would have on the parts of the world where they were operating.

A statement made in the early 90s that ‘the world is ready for Moshiach’,138 in

138 Sefer Hisvadiyot Shabbos, Parshas Korach, 3rd of Tammuz, 5751.

81context seems to imply that the ‘nations’ had indeed already been conquered, and

in some sense the ‘battles of God’ had already largely been won.

The next task that the potential Messiah must undertake, if he is to be called

the actual Messiah, is the building of the ‘Sanctuary in its place’. This reiterates what

Maimonides stated previously in chapter 11:1, ‘In the Future the King Messiah will

…build the Sanctuary…’ The reason why I have chosen to call this particular stage

in the messianic era, Binyan [Beis Ha] Mikdosh, ‘The building of the

Temple/Sanctuary,’ is because it is this event that above all marks the critical turning

point in the messianic unfolding. No matter how spiritualised the Rebbe’s

interpretation of the ‘wars of God’ and the defeat of the enemies of Israel, the one

event which makes the spiritual and ‘evangelical’ Messiah visible for all to see on

the stage of history is the concrete building of the Third Temple. It is this act above

all others that promotes the ‘presumed Messiah’ to the status of the ‘definite

Messiah’. Traditionally this event has been seen as the clear and unequivocal

boundary that separates the two main phases in the revelation of the Messiah. Later

we shall see how the Rebbe deliberately flirts with blurring this clear Halachic

distinction in order to raise the paradoxical possibility that as potential Messiah he

could become the ‘actual Messiah’, even if the Temple has not been actually built in

its place in Jerusalem.

The next task to be undertaken by the Messiah, once he has finished

rebuilding the Temple, is to gather in the dispersed remnants of Israel. The Rebbe did

not necessarily regard the events of the messianic scenario as strung out

chronologically in a clear linear progression, since he regarded the return of Soviet

Jewry to Israel in the late 1980’s and early 1990’s as a foretaste, and in some way a

fulfilment, of the promise of the ingathering of the exiles. The final task of the

Messiah is to affect the ‘repair’ and purification of the entire world. Maimonides

does not elaborate on what he envisages here, but the presumption is that it involves

bringing all men to acknowledge the one true God, and to join together in pure,

brotherly, unified worship of him.

There are other scenarios of the messianic era found in traditional Jewish

sources, which in some cases supplement, and in others contradict the Maimonidean

account. As I mentioned above, there is a further traditional stage in the unfolding of

82the messianic era, which Maimonides does not mention here, namely, the

resurrection of the dead (Techias HaMesim). There has always been a suspicion,

already expressed in his lifetime, that Maimonides, as a good Aristotelian, was not

entirely comfortable with the concept of the bodily resurrection of the dead. Though

it is somewhat curious that it is not mentioned here, Maimonides clearly believed in

it: it is mentioned in his Thirteen Principles in the Commentary on the Mishnah, in

his Epistle to the Yemen, and elsewhere in his writings. This resurrection is defined

traditionally as the rising en masse of every single Jewish man, woman or child that

ever existed, together with all the righteous gentiles throughout history. The event is

said to take place approximately forty years after the rebuilding of the Jerusalem

Temple,139 and to inaugurate a new era of miracles, marked by the complete

fulfilment of the positive prophecies of the Hebrew prophets, the cessation of death,

and, according to Nachmanides, eternal life on earth. The Rebbe and his followers

certainly believed in the future general resurrection of the dead. They also believed,

and this is not an element found anywhere in Maimonides, that the general

resurrection will be preceded by a minor resurrection140 that will take place just prior

to the rebuilding of the Jerusalem Temple.141 This will involve a distinguished elite

who would help the Messiah to position exactly and to rebuild the Temple. In

addition they will perhaps help to perform the dedication of it, and to reinstate the

sacrifices. Included in this small group would be Moses, Aaron, David and other

righteous kings and leaders of Israel.

We have analysed the Maimonidean scenario of the end-time, which was the

starting point for the Rebbe’s depiction of the messianic age, and we have briefly

considered how the Rebbe interpreted it. However, there was also another text that

was central to his conception of the messianic era and of the role of the Messiah. It is

the famous letter from the Baal Shem Tov to his brother-in-law Rabbi Gershon of

Kitov:

139 Zohar I, 139a, and 134a, see Chiddushei HaRan and Sha'arei Leshem, p. 489. Likkutei Sichos, Vol. 27, p. 206; Sefer HaSichos 5733, Shabbos Parshas Balak, footnote 3. Igros Kodesh, Vol. II, p. 75; Sefer HaSichos 5752, Vol. I, p. 274 140 Zohar III:3, Aruch LeNer on Niddah 61b, and on Sanhedrin 90b. 141 See Zohar I, 140a; Chiddushei Ritva on Rosh HaShanah 16b; Responsa of Radvaz, Vol. III, sections 1069, 644; Migdal David, p. 83a; Biurei HaZohar of the Tzemach Tzedek, p. 134. See also Sichos Kodesh 5710 (Kehot), p. 100, and Likkutei Sichos, Vol. II, p. 518.

83On Rosh HaShanah of the year 5507 (1746) I performed, by means of an oath, an elevation of soul, as known to you, and saw wondrous things I had never seen before. What I saw and learned there it is impossible to convey with words, even face to face … I ascended from level to level until I entered the chamber of the Moshiach, where Moshiach learns Torah with all the Tannaim and Tzadikim and also with the seven Shepherds … I asked Moshiach: ‘When will the Master come?’ And he answered: ‘By this you shall know: when your teachings will become public and revealed in the world, and your wellsprings burst forth to the farthest extremes — that which I have taught you and you have comprehended — and they also shall be able to perform unifications and elevations like you, then all of the ‘shells’ will cease to exist, and there shall be a time of good will and salvation.’142

A portion of this letter became a watchword of the Rebbe’s messianic doctrine,

namely, ‘I asked Moshiach: “When will the Master come?” And he answered: “By

this you shall know: when your teachings will become public and revealed in the

world, and your wellsprings burst forth to the farthest extremes…”‘ We will return to

a detailed consideration of this letter in Chapter 11, but a brief examination of how it

was understood within the context of the Rebbe’s messianism is necessary here.

What is striking is the tension between the Baal Shem Tov’s letter and

Maimonides’ messianic scenario. The Besht makes no reference to great public signs

of the Messiah’s arrival or of the beginning of the messianic age, in the way that

Maimonides does. He speaks of spiritual events: the spread of his teachings, the

performance of ‘unifications’ and ‘elevations’. The messianic age is vaguely

described in terms of ‘a time of good will’. No mention is made of wars, of defeat of

political foes, of great political leaders. The messianic age could well come ‘like a

thief in the night’, on the Besht’s view. It was doubtless as the result of his attempts

to reconcile the Besht with Maimonides that the Rebbe was drawn into so heavy a

spiritualized reading of Maimonides. He certainly saw the Besht as providing a

blueprint for bringing about the messianic age through ‘evangelism’. Moreover, the

Messiah’s arrival is not only dependent on the dissemination of the teachings of the

Baal Shem Tov, but the Messiah himself will be a revealer of such teachings.143 In

this conception there is, apparently, no dramatic historical event that defines the

Messiah and the messianic age. Rather the dawning of the messianic era will come

142 Scholem, The Messianic Idea in Judaism, pp. 182-3; Idel, Moshe. Messianic Mystics New Haven and London: Yale University Press. (1998). pp. 213-214. 143 Dinur, Benzion ‘The Messianic-Prophetic Role of the Baal Shem Tov’, in Saperstein, M. (ed.) Essential Papers on Messianic Movements and Personalities in Jewish History (1992). Dinur, Benzion ‘The Origins of Hasidism and Its Social and Messianic Foundations’ in Hundert G.D. (ed) Essential Papers on Hasidism (1991).

84about essentially through an intellectual and spiritual movement, a Hasidic

revolution that contrasts starkly with Maimonides seemingly more historical

scenario. The Rebbe has overlaid the Besht upon Maimonides and interpreted the

latter through the lens of the former. We will return to issues again in Chapter 7.

85

Chapter 6

The Rebbe’s Messianic Claims and Credentials

The Previous Rebbe as Moshiach

In the early 1940’s when the Previous Rebbe (Rabbi Yoseph Yitzchak Schneerson)

had only just arrived in the United States, there grew up around him a small but

passionate and vocal messianic movement. They saw the Holocaust as the birth

pangs of Moshiach and believed that the redemption was acutely imminent, and that

Rabbi Yoseph Yitzchak was their messianic redeemer. It seems that this may have

been instigated by the Previous Rebbe’s announcement: “Immediately to Teshuva

(repentance), immediately to the Redemption.”144 He then helped to set up the

framework of this messianic group to further the spread of his message. He called

them ‘Machne Yisroel’, the camp of Israel. 145

Machne Israel’s Mission: Through the actions and conduct of its members, to

strengthen the practice of Yiddishkeit (Judasim), the observance of the Torah

and [the performance of] mitzvos; to rouse the hearts of the Jewish people

and draw them close to teshuvah, Torah, and good deeds. To publicize the

truth — that [through] LeAlter LiTeshuvah (“Immediately to teshuvah”), [we

will proceed] LeAlter LiGeulah (“immediately to Redemption”) — the

ultimate Redemption, led by Mashiach.

It is uncertain what role Rabbi Menachem M. Schneerson (then the Rebbe’s son-in-

law) played in this messianic movement, but it is clear from his early speeches that

144 In the Kol Korei (announcement) published in HaKeriah VehaKedushah (Sivan-Tammuz, 5701; Elul, 5702) 1941-2. Also printed in the Igrot Kodesh by the Admor MehoRayaatz, v.5 p. 361 etc. 377 Also see Miamonides, Mishneh Torah, Hilchos Teshuvah 7:5: “The Torah has promised that ultimately, at the conclusion of its exile, Israel will turn to God in teshuvah and immediately afterwards, [the nation] will be redeemed.” 145 Greenberg, Gershon. “Consoling truth: Eliezer Schweid’s Ben hurban le'yeshua: a review essay” Modern Judaism, Volume 17, Number 3, October 1997, pp. 297-311. Gershon Greenberg, “Redemption after Holocaust according to Mahane Israel — Lubavitch, 1940-1945,” Modern Judaism Volume 12 (February, 1992): 61-84. Gershon Greenberg, “The Sect of Catastrophe: Mahane Israel-Lubavitch, 1940-1945”, Studies in Jewish Civilization Volume 3: Jewish Sects, Religious Movements, and Political Parties. Also, Elior, Rachel ‘The Lubavitch Messianic Resurgence: The Historical and Mystical Background 1939-1996’, in Schäfer, P,,. and Cohen, M. (eds.) Toward the Millenium: Messianic Expectations from Bible to Waco. Leiden: Brill, (1998).

86he believed that Rabbi Yoseph Yitzchak was the Moshiach of the generation, and

that his prophecy of “Immediately to Teshuva (repentance), immediately to the

Redemption” was still legitimate and relevant. At the end of the Rebbe’s first

inaugural speech146 (cited later in this chapter), despite alluding to his belief in his

own messianic potential, he spends most of the time talking about the Previous

Rebbe in unapologetically messianic terms,147 and says, ‘May we will be privileged

to see and meet with the Rebbe here is this world, in a physical body, in this earthy

domain — and he will redeem us!’148 Not only does this raise, as early as 1951, the

problem of belief in a posthumous messiah, a point to which we shall return in

Chapter 11, but also the issue of how the Rebbe understood his own messianic status

in relationship to his predecessor, whom he believed also to be Messiah.

The Rebbe’s relationship to the Previous Rebbe is intriguing and although it

would take us too far afield to discuss it fully here, we need to say something about it

in the context of the Rebbe’s self-understanding, and of the current state of

Lubavitch messianic belief. It needs to be pointed out that the Previous Rebbe had a

very different personality from that of Menachem Mendel, his son-in-law. The

Previous Rebbe came across as thoroughly human: he freely shared his feelings, his

fears, his joys, and innermost desires. That is not to say that the Rebbe did not

express emotion: quite the contrary; he was reported as crying publicly on many

occasions. However, his persona, the image that he carefully cultivated, was not that

of a down-to-earth human being, but more that of an ‘angel’ or the ‘divine’ manifest

in human form.

Despite these differences in personality, once the Rebbe and the Previous

Rebbe had established the Lubavitch headquarters in the United States, the Rebbe

showed marked humility and subservience towards his father-in-law. This was

probably not only in order to increase his chances of receiving the mantle of

leadership, but also to provide an example of the humility that his own followers

146 Shabbos Vayigash 5751, and Maamar of 10 Shevat 5711—1951. Also See: Schneerson, Rabbi Yosef. Y., and Schneerson, Rabbi Menachem M., Basi LeGani: Chassidic Discourses. Trans R. Eliyahu Touger & R. Sholom B. Wineberg, New York: Kehot Publication Society (1990). 147 Shabbos Vayigash 5751, and Maamar of 10 Shevat 5711—1951: “And my revered father-in-law, the [previous] Rebbe, of blessed memory, who ‘bore our ailments and carried our pains’, who was ‘anguished by our sins and ground down by our transgressions’ – just as he saw us in our affliction, so will he speedily in our days and rapidly in our times, redeem the sheep of his flock simultaneously from both the spiritual and physical exile.” 148 Shabbos Vayigash 5751, and Maamar of 10 Shevat 5711—1951

87were expected to show towards their new Rebbe. Even many years after the

Previous Rebbe had passed away, and the Rebbe had assumed leadership of the

movement, the Rebbe’s humility was said to be so great that he very rarely referred

to himself directly. On many occasions he would merely speak of himself as the

continuation and emissary of the Previous Rebbe. However, despite this

conspicuously humble gesture, the Rebbe’s own followers were perfectly able to

decode what was really meant. It was understood that on the many occasions when

the Rebbe spoke of the Previous Rebbe, his father-in-law, he was actually talking

about himself, or at least implying that each statement could equally apply to

himself.149 The Rebbe explained the logic behind this on the Tenth of Shevat 5721 –

1961: ‘...If one perceives negative traits in another and judges him … it is a

judgement about oneself; how much more so with regards to good traits. … His

holiness my father-in-law, the (Previous) Rebbe, publicised a statement of law

concerning his father. Behold with this statement he also rules with regards to

himself…’

In the online edition of the book And He Will Redeem Us the anonymous

editor explains this point and cites other evidence for this view:

The Rebbe rarely refers to himself openly. Rather, he often describes his leadership as merely a phase in, and extension of, the leadership of his father-in-law. When referring to his own work and life, the Rebbe uses phrases like ‘the Rebbe, my father-in-law, leader of our generation.’ (See Sichos Kodesh, Shabbos Mikeitz, 5713, Sichos Kodesh 5752, vol. 1, p. 318, Sefer HaSichos 5752, vol. 1, ch. 15)150

Over the following years the Rebbe would say many extraordinary things about the

Previous Rebbe. Not merely that the Previous Rebbe was ‘the leader of the

generation’, but also a Prophet, and more importantly that he was both the Moshiach

of the generation, and perhaps even the historical Messiah. The following are just an

example:

The words, ‘Please send the one whom You will eventually send’ [said by Moses, as he petitioned the Almighty to send the final Redeemer, the Moshiach], are beginning to be fulfilled. [This is] the mission of the Rebbe,

149 Sefer Hisvadiyot, Sichas Purim 5711, Sefer HaSichos 5750, p. 255. 150 http://www.moshiach.net/blind/ahwru/chap_1-1.htm (16th of December 2003).

88my father-in-law ... leader of our generation, the only emissary of our generation, and the only Moshiach of our generation.151

Who is Moshiach? I will not be troubled if anyone translates ‘Moshiach’ literally, i.e. the righteous Moshiach, since that is indeed the truth. The leader of the generation is in fact Moshiach of the generation.152

Such statements might lead one to suppose that the Rebbe actually believed only in

the Previous Rebbe as Moshiach, and did not imagine himself as a potential

messianic candidate, but merely as a devotee who looked for the posthumous return

of the Previous Rebbe. However, in the following quotation the Rebbe makes more

explicit his relationship to his predecessor, and shows that he does not intend to rule

out the possibility of his own messiahship153:

Moshiach Tzidkeinu [our Righteous Moshiach], the emissary regarding whom it was said [by Moses as he petitioned the Almighty], ‘Please send the one whom You will eventually send,’ namely, the [previous] Rebbe, leader of our generation. This likewise applies to his successor, the continuation and extension [of his leadership] after him.154

Not only is the Rebbe the Previous Rebbe’s successor, but also by default he

becomes the Moshiach of the generation, and, elsewhere, also a Prophet, as will be

discussed later in this chapter.

The Seventh Leader is the Messiah

It is one of the main contentions of this dissertation that, contrary to what is

sometimes said, the Moshiach campaign, and particularly the campaign to proclaim

the Rebbe as the Messiah, was not driven exclusively by the zealots among his

followers, although they certainly played a role. It has been argued quite successfully

on the public relations front that the primary movers and shakers in this new

messianic movement were returnees (Baalai Teshuva), and this is not entirely wrong.

However, this argument distracts our attention from the ultimate source of this

151 Shabbos Chayei Sarah, Sefer HaSichos 5752, ch. 13.

152 Eve of Simchas Torah 5746-October 27, 1985. 153 See also, Eve of the fifth of Sukkos, 5747, Sefer Hisvaduyos, unedited; Shabbos Naso, 5720, unedited. Shabbos Beshalach, 5724, unedited, printed in Tzadik L'Melech, vol. 2, p. 64; Shabbos

Tazria-Metzora, 5751, ch. 14; Shabbos Vayeira, 5752, ch. 14 (October 26, 1991). 154 Sichos Kodesh 5752 vol. 1, p. 318.

89messianic excitement, and that was the Rebbe himself. The messianic movement

in general, and the movement to proclaim the Rebbe as the Presumed Messiah in

particular, goes back to the Rebbe himself.

In 1951, after accepting the role as leader of the Chabad-Lubavitch

movement, the Rebbe summarised and expounded the first chapter of the last

discourse of the Previous Rebbe. The discourse is, amongst other things, a Hasidic

and Kabbalistic interpretation of Midrash Rabbah’s exposition of Song of Songs 5:1,

which describes the Divine Presence’s ascent away from the world and its descent

back towards it in a circular pattern of seven stages, the ascent starting with the sin of

the Tree of Knowledge, and the descent beginning with the service of Abraham.

However, the Rebbe’s ingenious interpretation takes this meditation on the

significance of the number seven, and subtly but notably applies it to the leaders of

the Chabad-Lubavitch movement, of which he was now becoming the seventh. The

Rebbe’s inaugural speech clearly spelled out not only his vision for the movement

and his role as its messianic leader, but also captured the core of his paradoxical

messianic theology. The Maamor implied that his generation was to be the one that

merited the ultimate messianic revelation, and that he was to be the long awaited

Messiah, even though, to confuse matters, he points to his deceased predecessor as

the messianic candidate, as mentioned earlier.

The following is a brief and extensively edited quotation that aims to

summarise the entire discourse. An overview of this discourse is necessary if we are

to understand how intrinsic many of the Rebbe’s early ideas were to his later public

messianism, and why his followers felt so compelled to assert their belief in his

messianic potential, almost from his installation as the seventh Rebbe of the Chabad-

Lubavitch dynasty, and then throughout his leadership.

‘I have come into My garden, My sister, My bride.’ …which means ‘to My bridal chamber.’ The Divine Presence is thus saying: ‘I have come into My bridal chamber, into the place in which My essence was originally revealed.’ The Midrash continues: ‘...for the essence of the Shechinah was originally apparent in this lowly world,’ ... this physical world… It was specifically through Moshe that the Shechinah was drawn down, the reason being … that ‘all those who are seventh are cherished.’ [Moses being the Seventh righteous individual, from Abraham]… It is true that the seventh of a series is very much loved, and that this status comes not as a result of choice nor as a result of one’s divine service, but … merely as a result of birth. Nevertheless, there

90are no inherent limitations that should cause an individual to say that this status is beyond him, and that it is accessible only to a select few. On the contrary … every Jew, even a slave and handmaiden can attain the inspiration of the Divine Spirit. …This, then, is why the seventh is so cherished: it is he who draws down …the essence of the Shechinah… into this lowly world. It is this that is demanded of each and every one of us of the seventh generation [and]…we are now very near the approaching footsteps of Moshiach. Indeed, we are at the conclusion of this period, and our spiritual task is to complete the process of drawing down … the essence of the Shechinah — specifically within our lowly world… [Since] it is impossible to state that the ultimate intent of creation was for the sake of the higher worlds, for even [the loftiest of them,] the World of Atzilus, is [merely] a revelation of that which had previously been concealed…. we must therefore say that the ultimate goal is this physical world, wherein … it is felt that its being derives from its own self… [that, the physical] created beings not only fail to reveal [their] Creator, they actually hide and conceal their source; moreover, they feel that their being derives from themselves… Nonetheless, the very fact that it is able to imagine that it derives from its own self, is a result of its being rooted in God's Essence – whose Being derives from His Essence. …The ultimate objective, then, is this lowly physical world, for so the idea arose in God's blessed Will that He experiences delight ‘when the forces of evil are subdued and darkness is converted into light.’ … Indeed, the dwelling made for God in this world through the subordination and transformation of materiality — [so that the Creator can say,] ‘I have returned to My garden’ — is superior to [that which existed] before the sin [of the Tree of Knowledge]… This, then, is what is demanded of us, the seventh generation from the Alter Rebbe [the first Rebbe of Chabad], of … [the] kind of divine service [which] resembles that of Abraham: arriving in places where nothing was known of Godliness, nothing was known of Judaism, nothing was even known of the Aleph Beis, and while there setting oneself completely aside [and proclaiming God's Name] in the spirit of the teaching of the Sages, ‘Do not read “he proclaimed,” but “he made others proclaim.”’ … Nonetheless, it must be known that if a person desires to succeed in enjoying his own ‘proclamation’, he must see to it that others not only know but ‘proclaim’ as well. And although until now one’s fellowman was utterly ignorant, one is now obliged to see to it that he too vociferously proclaims joining ‘God’ and ‘world’ together, and not ‘God of the world.’ For the latter phrase would imply that God is an entity unto Himself and the world is a separate entity unto itself, except that God governs and rules the world; rather, Godliness and the world are wholly One… This accords with what is written concerning Moshiach: ‘And he shall be exalted greatly...’: even more than was Adam before the sin. And my revered father-in-law, the Rebbe, of blessed memory, who ‘bore our ailments and carried our pains,’ who was ‘anguished by our sins and ground down by our transgressions,’ — just as he saw us in our affliction, so will he speedily in our days and rapidly in our times, redeem the sheep of his flock

91simultaneously from both the spiritual and physical exile, and … the Rebbe will bind and unite us with the infinite Essence of God... We conclude ‘… God will be One and His Name One’ — no difference will exist between God and His Name. All the above is accomplished through the passing (histalkus) of Zaddikim, that is even harsher than the destruction of the Temple. Since we have already experienced all these things, everything now depends only on us — the seventh generation. May we be privileged to see and meet with the Rebbe here is this world, in a physical body, in this earthy domain — and he will redeem us.155

In other words, just as Moses was the seventh leader, and brought down God into the

world at Mount Sinai, so the Rebbe is the seventh leader who will bring down the

Essence of the Shechinah, the Essence of God, to this lowly physical world,

continuing and completing the service of Abraham of ‘joining “God” and “World”

together’, a state that is a hallmark of both the Messiah and the Messianic Era, and

which in the seventh generation will be accomplished by the Rebbe. The Rebbe left

no room for doubt as to which generation was the seventh, ‘... Our generation, the

seventh generation since the Alter Rebbe ... and this generation immediately

becomes the generation of the Geula ... that is going to meet our righteous Moshiach

…’, and he explained that this was ‘the last generation of the exile and the first of the

Geula’156 It was because of the clearly latent messianic implications of this and other

such discourses, that his Hasidim caught on to what they felt he was implying, and

soon a few bold and impulsive followers went public and started proclaiming him as

the long awaited Messiah. Despite such allusions, and even more clear and

unambiguous statements and references to his messianic potential, some of which

will be discussed later in this chapter, the Rebbe steadfastly denied and opposed any

explicit and public declarations of this belief, claiming that it would distance people

outside of the movement from the study of Hasidic philosophy, Chabad, and

ultimately, from Judaism.

Even as early as 1967, Reb Avraham Parise, one of his followers, publicly

declared the Rebbe’s messianic status, by dropping a plane load of pamphlets over

Tel-Aviv. The Rebbe is said to have been furious and ordered all the leaflets to be

picked up. Just two years later Rabbi Gutnick, in a private discussion with the Rebbe

155 Schneerson, Rabbi Yosef Y., and Schneerson Rabbi Menachem M, Basi LeGani: Chassidic Discourses. Trans R. Eliyahu Touger & R. Sholom B. Wineberg, New York: Kehot Publication Society. (1990).

156 Shabbos Vayigash 5751, and Ma’amar of 10 Shevat 5711-1951.

92about whether the Six Day War had messianic significance, had suggested that the

Rebbe fitted Maimonides’ prerequisites of the Potential Messiah, to which the Rebbe

is said to have responded that he was still not the Actual Messiah. As mentioned

earlier (Chapter 1), there are reports that claim that Leible Groner, the Rebbe’s first

personal assistant, is said to have been actively attempting to convince his guests that

the Rebbe was fit to be the Potential Messiah. In the late 1970’s, approximately

1978, a song circulated amongst the Hasidim which pointed to the Rebbe as being

the Messiah, ‘Chailei Adonainoo, … Moshiach Tzidkeinu…’, literally ‘Soldiers of

our Master…our righteous Messiah’, which was often sung at the celebration of

Simchas Torah.157

The Rebbe declared the year 1982 ‘the year in which Moshiach will come’,

based on the Hebrew letters which make up the year 5742, and helped to compose

the song, ‘Am Yisroel have no fear, Moshiach will be here this year’, later adding

‘We want Moshiach now!’ This song circulated amongst, and was often sung by, the

community of Hasidim in front of, and towards the Rebbe both at Simchas Torah and

on other occasions throughout the years that followed. The Rebbe called 1983 the

year of the revelation of Moshiach. On Simchas Torah of that year whilst the song

‘Chailei Adonainoo’ was being sung, he even asked a young follower present, if he

was indeed a soldier of the Rebbe’s army, and if so why wasn’t he also singing? He

called 1984 ‘the year of the words of Moshiach’; also commenting that it might be

feasible to call it ‘the year of the words of Menachem, seeing that Menachem is one

of the Talmudic names for Moshiach.’158

In 1985, arguably as a result of the Rebbe’s increased focus not only on

Jewish messianism in general, but also on the possibility of him personally being the

future messiah, some of his followers, such as Dovid Nachshon, Rabbi Shalom Dov

Wolpo and others, attempted publicly to pronounce or state in so many words that

the Rebbe was the long awaited Messiah. In reaction the Rebbe’s public support of

any such belief almost vanished. The song, ‘Chailei Adonainoo … Moshiach

Tzidkeinu…’, which the Rebbe had positively encouraged for almost eight years, was

now forbidden to be sung at all, and the Rebbe continued vehemently to reject any

157 From conversation with Rabbi Hillel Blesoffski (Manchester 2004). 158 Sanhedrin 98b; also, the name figures prominently as a name for the Messiah in the classic Geonic apocalypse Sefer Zerubbavel.

93public statements or suggestions that he was a potential messianic candidate or the

long awaited Messiah even until the very end of 1989, although those in the anti-

messianic camp naturally claim that this opposition continued well into 1992.

There is then a vast inconsistency between the Rebbe’s teachings that he

regarded as being solely for internal consumption and those, which he felt, were

suitable for the public. The Rebbe was on one hand whipping up his followers into a

messianic frenzy, all the time hinting at the fact that he was the Messiah or a

potential messianic candidate, and yet on the other hand belittling and condemning

anyone who attempted to make such a claim public. This entire episode has often

been used by the anti-messianic faction within the Chabad-Lubavitch movement to

prove that the Rebbe never actually wanted the idea that he was the Messiah to be

spread, and that, in fact, it was not his own belief but only that of his followers.

There has been much misinformation about the movement to proclaim the Rebbe as

‘Messiah’, and the Rebbe’s reaction to it. Even some well respected academics, (as

mentioned in chapter 3 and later in chapter 12 below) have fallen for the public

relations ploy spun by those within the Chabad-Lubavitch movement who saw it as

their task to blame the whole unseemly episode on the Rebbe’s fanatical followers, in

an attempt to distance the Rebbe from the events. They have done this by claiming

that most of those involved with the ‘Moshiach Campaign’ were ‘returnees’ or ‘bad-

blood’, and therefore tended to be less informed, perhaps more emotionally unstable

and more easily led by vocal individuals who deliberately misinterpreted the Rebbe’s

teachings. They even go as far as to say that ‘the Rebbe never said he was the

Messiah’, or that ‘the Rebbe opposed and condemned anyone claiming that he was

the Messiah’. What they disingenuously fail to point out is that although the Rebbe

may have not have actually proclaimed, ‘I am the Messiah!’ he said so in as many

words, as will be examined later in this chapter. Moreover, his opposition to any

public declarations to this effect was apparently not because he did not actually agree

with the premise, but rather because he felt it was not, from a public relations

perspective, the right time to make such a claim. If he was not solely motivated by

public relations’ considerations, it is extremely difficult to understand why on one

hand he so strongly discouraged his followers from telling anyone their belief in his

potential messianic candidacy, and yet on the other, seemed so quickly to change his

policy in 1990 in response to the growing clamour to claim he was Moshiach.

Eventually in 1992, even before his first stroke, he encouraged the signing of a

94petition, which had been circulating throughout the Chabad-Lubavitch world,

proclaiming him as the long awaited Messiah, publicly approved of the crowds

singing ‘Yechi…’ ‘Long Live Our Master, Our Teacher and Rebbe, the King

Messiah Forever and Ever!’, and openly encouraged his followers’ belief in his

messianism, based on a quotation in Talmud Sanhedrin, claiming that this belief was

in fact a normative and integral part of traditional Judaism.159 After suffering his first

stroke the Rebbe seemed to continue to encourage the singing of Yechi and the

publication of excerpts of his discourses, which clearly called him Melech Ha-

Moshiach.160 This sort of behaviour only increased over the next two years before his

passing, except at times when he was completely out of the public view.

The Rebbe as Prophet

In 1991, at the height of the messianic furore, the Rebbe made an unprecedented

statement about the previous Lubavitcher Rebbe, Rabbi Yoseph Yitzchak

Schneersohn, in which he called him an actual ‘Prophet’. By calling the Previous

Rebbe a ‘Prophet’ the Rebbe paved the way for claiming something even more

radical, viz., that he himself was, in consequence, also a Prophet, in fact, ‘the Prophet

of the generation’. It might be tempting to play down the significance of such

statements, and attribute them to some sort of ‘mystical fervour’. However, the

majority of the Rebbe’s followers did not take these claims lightly, nor did they

interpret them as referring to the Ruach Ha-Kodesh (Holy Spirit), in any weak or

unspecific sense161 In response to the question as to whether the Rebbe’s

announcement of prophecy (nevuah) was meant literally or metaphorically, Rabbi

Eliyahu Cohen162 wrote:

159 Sanhedrin 93b 160 Schneerson, Rabbi Menachem M. B’Suras Hageulah (Hebrew/Yiddish). New York: Kehot Publication Society. (1993); also see the English version; Besuras HaGeulo: The Announcement of the Redemption. Trans. Rabbi Yisroel Heschel Greenburg and Rabbi Yisroel Ber Kaufman. New York. Vaad L’hafotzas Sichot. (1998), and Valperan, Rabbi Sholom Dovbear HaLevi, Yechi Ha Melech Ha Moshiach. Published by Rabbi Sholom Dovbear Ha Levi Valperan. Israel (1992). 161 The use of the term Ruach Ha-Kodesh in Judaism is complex and inconsistent. While it can be seen as the equivalent to ‘the spirit of prophecy’ (Ruach Ha-Nevuah), it can also denote a low-level intuitive/psychic inspiration or insight, at least as compared to that of prophecy. 162 One of the leading Rabbis of the Lubavitch Pro-Messianic movement, and then student chaplain to New York University, and co-editot of And HE Will Redeem Us – Moshiach in Our Times. New York: Mendelsohn Press (1994).

95‘Of course the Rebbe said it and meant it…When I asked Leible Altein about the question of Nevuah, his response was that not only in Shoftim163 but in numerous other places the Rebbe made it clear that this is real Nevuah — halachikly. What the obligation of someone who does not know the Rebbe well enough to recognise his nevuah is — I'm not sure. But for those of us who do know him and recognise the authority of his words, it is unequivocal…’ 164

In order to understand what ‘real Nevuah halachikly’ means we need to introduce a

general discussion of who qualified as a prophet in the opinion of Maimonides. Since

Maimonides is one of the few major Halachic codifiers who rules concretely on the

definition and status of a prophet, this will primarily involve an examination and

exploration of his rulings on the subject. This discussion will not only inform our

understanding of the Halachic status of the Rebbe’s prophetic credentials, but also

affect the impact as ‘prophecy’ of the ‘prophetic’ statements, which he made.

The attitude of Jewish theology towards prophecy is highly complex. As the

following quotation from Maimonides demonstrates, though dramatic miracles

affecting the physical world and over-riding the laws of nature can validate an

individual’s prophetic claims, as they did in the case of Moses and Elijah, such

miracles are not always halachically required. A prophet who comes to strengthen

the Jewish people’s lagging observance of the Torah and its commandments (or, as

in Jonah’s case, to admonish the peoples of the world), can be judged by a less

demanding standard, viz., whether or not he was able to predict the future

successfully.

All prophets that stand before us, and say that God sent them, do not have to do any miracles … except this miracle, which is to speak of future events in the world. … If a man comes who is fit to be a prophet in the kingdom of God, and has not come to add or detract, but only to serve God by the mitzvot of the Torah, you do not say to him, ‘Split the sea!’, or ‘Resurrect the dead’ …and only then we will believe you! But rather, say to him, ‘If you are a prophet, tell us of future events, those things that are going to be…’, and then he says [what they are], and we wait to see if these things happen or not. And if even a small thing falls [from his prophecy], you know he is a false prophet, and if all the things happen [that he said would happen], he is in our

163 See Appendix, 5751-1991, p.792. 164 In an email dated 24 July 2001.

96eyes to be believed. And test him many times,165 and if his words happen, believe them all, for behold he is a true prophet.166

Prophets are of different kinds, and from a traditional point of view, though some

would claim that many miracles actually did occur in the Rebbe’s presence,167 and as

a result of his words, these are not strictly necessary for confirmation of his prophetic

or messianic status,168 nor do they damage his prophetic status either. As a prophet

who came neither to add nor to detract form the Torah, but to bring the community

back to the performance of the mitzvoth, he does not need such validation.169

What are the theological implications of the claim that the Rebbe was a

prophet? The first point to note is the Talmudic insistence that the phenomenon of

prophecy came to an end some time between Ezra and the destruction of the Second

Temple. This is the implication of passages such as Pirkei Avot 1:1 where the Torah

is said to have been handed on in this period from the Prophets to the Men of the

Great Synagogue, that is to say to the scholars. The clear implication is that from

then on the will of God was to be discerned by the Sages, exercising their innate

faculties to understand and to apply the Torah given once-for-all at Sinai, and that

miracles were irrelevant to their deliberations. This is illustrated by the famous story

in the Talmud about the dispute between the Sages over an Akhnai oven (Babylonian

Talmud, Bava Metzia 59a-b). Having seen his arguments rejected by the other

scholars, Rabbi Eliezer resorts to miracle to prove his case. He performs three

dramatic physical miracles, only to have them each ruled out of court. Finally he

appeals directly to heaven, which obliges with a bas kol proclaiming that Rabbi

Eliezer’s view is in accord with the opinion of the Celestial Beis Din. But the bas kol

(which is a form of prophetic revelation) is also ruled as inadmissible evidence, on

the grounds that ‘lo ba-shamayim hi’ (‘it is not in heaven’): ‘since God gave the

Torah on Sinai, and in that Torah it is stated that cases are to be decided by the

majority opinion of the Sages, ‘we do not listen to a heavenly voice’.

165 According to the major commentaries this is three times. 166 Maimonides Hilchot Yesodey Hatorah 10:5. 167 See: Wonders And Miracles, Stories of the Lubavitcher Rebbe, K’far Chabad Israel: Maareches Ufaratzta. (1993). 168 ‘Do not imagine that the anointed King (Moshiach) must perform miracles and signs and create new things in the world or resurrect the dead and so on’ See: Maimonides Hilkhot Melakhim Umilchamoteihem, chapter 11. 169 Maimonides Hilchot Yesodey Hatorah Chapter 9:2.

97 It is indeed arguable whether, in fact, the phenomenon of prophecy ever

totally ceased within Judaism. The apocalyptic movement of Second Temple times

has clearly some relationship to prophecy: from a literary point of view it borrows

heavily fundamental elements and motifs from the prophetic writings, though it

testifies eloquently to the prevailing belief at this period in the demise of prophecy

that none of the apocalyptists presents his own views under his own name, but

pseudepigraphically in the name of great figures from the prophetic past. In the

Talmudic period, arguably within a Talmudic milieu (though this is disputed), the

Heikhalot mystics engaged in prophetic activities with their ascents to heaven, their

visions and their conjurations of the Sar Torah down to earth. Unease about the

activities of the Yoredei Merkavah is evident in the Talmud. In the Middle Ages we

find people being talked of as possessing the Ruach ha-Kodesh, and being called

‘prophets’, though possibly only in a rather loose sense. Even Maimonides seems to

entertain the possibility that prophecy, which he philosophically identified with

union with the Active Intellect, was still attainable through the right intellectual and

moral training (Aristotle had all but achieved it; Maimonides himself may actually

have succeeded). Maimonides’ follower Abraham Abulafia, believed he had actually

found the secret of achieving prophetic inspiration, which he identified as an ecstatic

state of altered consciousness.170 So the cessation of prophecy is not as absolute

within the tradition as might at first sight appear, and the term navi, or the related

title chozeh (‘seer’), can be applied to a variety of figures long after the close of the

biblical era, right down to modern times. Nevertheless, the cessation of prophecy is a

fundamental tenet of the Rabbinic credo, and as a result a claim to prophetic powers

raises immediate interest and questions.

The reason for this is simple. Cessation of prophecy underpins Rabbinic

authority by transferring access to the will of God from those to whom God speaks

directly (prophets) to those who discover it through interpreting His written word

(scribes and scholars). If prophecy still continues, then the authority of the scribes

and scholars can always be subverted by an appeal to fresh revelation. By stating that

prophecy had ended, the Rabbis not only entrenched their own power and authority,

but made prophecy suspect, and indeed potentially heretical. Yet there was a strong

170 Idel, Messianic Mystics. Chapter Two, Abraham Abulafia: Ecstatic and Spiritual Messianism.

New Haven and London: Yale University press. (1998), Idel, Moshe. Mystical Experience in Abraham Abulafia. (SUNY Series in Judaica: Hermeneutics, Mysticism & Religion) also Scholem, Gershom. Sabbatai Sevi, pp. 120-145

98belief that prophecy would return: the present period of its absence is an interlude

between two great prophetic eras. The reasons for this are complex. One answer to

the question of why prophecy had ceased in the first place was to argue that it was a

phenomenon associated with political autonomy, peace and prosperity for the Jewish

people. Its demise more or less coincided with the end of political freedom. But that

freedom will return in the Messianic Age, and so logically prophecy should return as

well. 171 Scripture supports this argument,172 in as much as the arrival of the Messiah

was to be heralded by the reappearance of Elijah the Prophet.173 The Messiah himself

would have prophetic powers: he is widely identified with ‘the prophet like Moses’

whose coming God promised in the Torah. The biblical prophets themselves, living

at the close of the old prophetic era as the phenomenon palpably waned, predicted its

return in strength at the end of history, on a scale never seen before, when ‘I will

pour out my spirit upon all flesh; and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy;

you old men shall dream dreams, your young men see visions’.174 The return of

prophecy is, therefore, inevitably bound up with the arrival of the Messianic Era.175

The Rebbe was totally aware of the resonance of his claim to prophecy. To

accord prophetic status to himself at once gave his utterances the highest religious

authority that Judaism recognizes, but at the same time it indicated that the Messianic

Era was about to arrive, or had indeed already begun. It was also fully compatible

with his own potential role as the Messiah, or at least as the Messiah’s forerunner.

On Shabbos Parshas Shoftim 5751 he commented on the return of prophecy as

follows: ‘Indeed, in his Iggeres Taimon, the Maimonides writes that “as a

preparatory step to the Moshiach’s coming ... prophecy will return to Israel.” This

can be understood in the context of the explanations given above. To prepare us to be

able to receive the Era of the Redemption, we must experience through prophecy a

foretaste of the “advice” that will be communicated in that era. The Rebbe’s claim to

prophetic status is not to be understood in any loose sense, simply as a spiritual

171 The Shabbetian Movement reintroduced prophecy, both in its leadership and in some of its followers and adherents. See. Scholem, Gershom, Shabbetai Zevi: The Mystical Messiah, 1626-1676 New Jersy: Princeton, (1976) pp. 254, 258, 377, 417-418, 422, 433, 532, 545, 549, 607, 654, 705.

Also see, Goldish, Matt. The Sabbatean Prophets. Harvard University Press (2004). 172 Zechariah 9:10, II Samuel 8:6, Obadiah 1:21, Psalms 130:7 173 Malachi. 3:23. and Talmud - Mas. Eiruvin 43b 174 Zechariah 8:22-23, Isaiah 2:2-4, Jeremiah 3:17, Joel 3.1-2,5, Ezekiel 36:28-36, Shemos Rabbah 23:1, Avos D'Rabbi Nosson 35:19, Maimonides Mishneh Torah Hilchos Melachim 11:4, 12:5; Ramchal, Maamar HaIkkarim, "BaGe'ulah." Maimonides, Igeres Teiman (Epistle to the Yemen) . 175 "Shortly before the messianic era, prophecy will return to the Jewish people." Maimonides Igeres Teiman (Epistle to the Yemen) p. 30.

99metaphor, or as an aspiration. He was very much aware of the context of what he

was saying, even explicitly stating that this pronouncement was Halachic in nature.

This ties in with his broad messianic agenda to actualize the Redemption in the

present, and to use, if necessary, the authoritative and magical/mystical power of the

Halacha to do so.

The Humble and Clever Prophet

It is important to note that the Rebbe did not base his claim to prophecy solely on his

own religious qualities, but rather on those of his father-in-law, whose religious

integrity and standing no one within the movement or outside of it, could or would

ever challenge. Legitimate difficulties could be raised with regard to the Rebbe’s

assertion that the Previous Rebbe was a prophet, but what is really central to our

present discussion is (once again) the Rebbe’s understanding of aspects of the

teaching of Maimonides. A crucial passage is to be found in the first half of a Sicha

on Parshas Shoftim for 5751-1991. The Rebbe compares the injunction ‘Judges and

Advisers you shall place at all your gates…’ with a verse in Isaiah, whom he calls

‘the prophet of the Redemption’, and with other quotes of a similar nature. These

parallel verses clearly indicate that the process of appointing Judges and Advisers

applies to the messianic era. The issue the Rebbe raises, almost without having to say

so, is that he believes that this biblical verse is not only relevant today on some moral

or mystical level, but actually applies today as a mitzvah!

Here are his actual words, intersected by my comments:

…To publicise this and for all to…accept this… the lessons and directives of the ‘Judge’ and ‘Adviser’ of the generation, ‘Rabbis are called Kings’176 in general, and especially with the leader of the generation — this comes in continuation of our Rebbe and the leaders that came before — the Judge of the generation, the Adviser of the generation and the Prophet of the

generation.177

The call to publicise this belief or idea to all, takes it out of what could be argued is

the realm of Hasidic fantasy and into the public domain, where the idea inevitably

176 Gittin 62a (end).

177 Shabbos Parshas Shoftim 5751 My emphasis.

100will be debated. This and the following statements are to be understood as a

revelation of the facts, the reality not only of the Previous Rebbe’s status as a

prophet, but of the Rebbe’s own prophetic status as well. In the next section of the

talk, the Rebbe brings biblical as well as rabbinic sources to prove that the previous

Rebbe was an actual prophet, and that this idea is not an alien concept, but well

within the norms of traditional Judaism. The proof he provides is based on

Maimonides’ statement that in order for a prophet to be considered a true prophet he

must correctly predict, according to the majority opinion, at least three events. The

Rebbe then almost rhetorically asks his Hasidim to agree with him that the previous

Rebbe showed such signs of being a prophet. It is questionable whether the Previous

Rebbe, or for that matter the Rebbe himself, were ever officially tested by anyone to

prove that they were indeed prophets. However, personal accounts as well as famous

stories do gift the Rebbe (and, at least according to the Rebbe, the Previous Rebbe)

with prophetic insights on more than three occasions.178 Moreover, as the Rebbe

himself explains, Maimonides in an earlier passage (Yesodei haTorah 10:5) states

that ‘if a previous prophet calls another a prophet, there is no need to test him!’

which radically reverses the Deuteronomical instruction to test a prophet to see

whether or not they are false.179

Once again, it is important to grasp how the Rebbe’s call to publicize the

Previous Rebbe’s prophetic status fundamentally changes things. If it is the case that

at least some, if not all, the pronouncements of the Previous Rebbe are to be taken as

the words of a prophet, it is imperative to listen to what he has to say. Not only is he

speaking the word of God, but, if a Sanhedrin were in place, disagreeing, or going

against his words, might be punishable by death.180

… The command of the Torah, mentioned above, is: ‘I will establish a prophet for them from amongst their brethren, like you, and I will place my words in his mouth. He shall speak to them everything that I will command him. It is incumbent upon you to hear him.’ And in accordance with the above mentioned Psak Din of Maimonides, that [there is only] one who has the qualities and perfection that a prophet needs to have, and he provides miracles and wonders — just see how the satiety in continuation of the

178 Wonders And Miracles: Stories of the Lubavitcher Rebbe, K’far Chabad Israel: Maareches Ufaratzta. (1993) Also see: The Rebbe’s Prophecies here in Chapter 6. (The Six Day War, The Yom Kippur War and The First Gulf War). 179 Deuteronomy 18:21-22.

180 Deuteronomy 18:19 and Sanhedrin 89a.

101fulfilment of his blessings, that happened through the leader of the generation — we don’t believe him because of miracles alone…etc. Rather, just as it is a Mitzvah that Moses commanded in Torah when he said, ‘if he gives signs listen to him’, so likewise it says, ‘and if he says words of future events that will take place in the world, believe in his words’181 (as we see in case of the Previous Rebbe). 182

He further explains that since the previous Rebbe was a prophet, there are no reasons

to doubt that he too is a prophet. Moreover people are not allowed to test him, he

claims. He continues:

A prophet who appoints for himself another prophet, he is [also] a prophet — and this applies to the leader of the generation, and this continues in the generation that comes afterwards through his students — behold he is presumed to be a prophet, and this, the second one, does not need to be tested; it is required to obey him straight away, immediately even ‘before he makes a sign’, and it is ‘forbidden to question him, and to look into his prophecy, that perhaps it is not true, and it is forbidden to test him more than required etc., as it says,183 “Do not test the Lord Your God by testing him with tests etc.”. Rather after it is known that he is a prophet, believe in him and know that God is within him, and do not think about and do not reckon unto him etc.,184 in truth….’185

The Rebbe has found a very convenient Halachic loophole, which he has to some

extent exploited. The question might well be asked why he felt he needed to use it.

Why could he not have claimed that as ‘the leader of the generation’, he was a

prophet, because he predicted at least three events that came to pass. A case could

surely have been made out that, as many of his Hasidim hold, the Rebbe’s ‘prophetic

abilities’ far outweighed those of his predecessor. Why then validate his prophetic

status in this oblique way? A possible reason occurred to me after reading David

Berger’s polemic against Lubavitch messianism, to which I shall return at greater

length in Chapter 11. Berger mistakenly criticises the Rebbe for calling himself a

prophet just because he seems to have predicted three world events, and uses this

criticism to challenge his religious authority, without, apparently, having read what

the Rebbe himself said on the subject. Could the Rebbe have foreseen just such a line

of attack, if he based his prophetic claims on the strength of his own gifts and

powers, and rather than face such criticism head on, he used the previous Rebbe as a

181 Maimonides, Hilchot Yesodey HaTorah 10. 182 Sefer Ha Sichos Parsha Shoftim 5751 pp.780-795 (mentioned above). 183 Deuteronomy 6:16. 184 Maimonides, Hilchot Yesodey HaTorah 5:5. 185 Sefer Ha Sichos, Parsha Shoftim 5751 pp.780-795.

102shield? The Rebbe had vocal opponents and critics within the Orthodox Jewish

World,186 but the Previous Rebbe had few.187 It is possible, therefore to construe the

conspicuous honour and admiration, which the Rebbe accorded his predecessor, as

well as his belief that he was simply a continuator of the Previous Rebbe, as

motivated by a need to verify and legitimise his own beliefs and actions.

This strange oscillation between humility and egocentricity is perhaps the

hallmark of a deeply mystical personality, which swings rapidly between assertion

and negation of the self. This comes out in the continuation of the talk with the claim

that ‘… It is the words of the prophet that are to be believed, and not just because

they are the words of a prophet, but rather because they are God’s words through the

prophet!’ The Rebbe is here asking his audience to listen to and believe in his words

not simply because he is a prophet, but rather because they are the words of God. It is

the words of the prophet, and not the prophet himself that should be the object of

belief. This suggests a view of prophecy which conceives of the prophet simply as a

vessel or channel, and therefore, in a sense, personally of little or no importance. Yet

in the very next sentence the Rebbe seems to swing to the other extreme by

pronouncing that he is ‘incomparably higher than the people of the generation’.

From this above mentioned directive, which is to publicise to all people of the generation, that we have merited that God has given and set aside a Master of free choice, who on his own part is himself incomparably higher than the people of the generation, in order to be a ‘Judge’ and ‘Adviser’ and the Prophet of the generation, who should indicate advise and give answers to and for the service of all Jews and all the people of the generation …’188

Prophecy has returned, even before the actual completion of the Redemption.

However it seems that prophetic powers at this stage are limited to the Messiah.

186 Rabbi Elezer Menachem Shach (Rav Shach), David Berger, as well as R. Aharon Kotler, R. Dovid Leibowitz, and R. Henoch Leibowitz. See, Michael Specter, ‘The Oracle of Crown Heights’, New York Times Magazine, March 15, 1992. 187 The Chazon Ish, R. Aharon Kotler, R. Dovid Leibowitz, R. Henoch Leibowitz, See Gershon Greenberg, “Redemption after Holocaust according to Mahane Israel — Lubavitch, 1940-1945,” Modern Judaism 12 (February, 1992): 61-84. And, Gershon Greenberg, “The Sect of Catastrophe: Mahane Israel-Lubavitch, 1940-1945” Studies in Jewish Civilization Volume 3: Jewish Sects, Religious Movements and Political Parties. 188 Sefer HaSichos Parsha Shoftim 5751 pp. 780-795.

103Thus it is important to realize the ruling of Jewish law also for our times (even before the Redemption), that the revelation of prophecy does exist (for Moshiach, even prior to the Redemption) ...189

He then concludes with a sort of joint announcement of the ‘prophecy’ of both

himself and the previous Rebbe:

Concerning the main prophecy — the prophecy ‘immediately to Redemption’, speedily, really and literally —‘Behold this (Moshiach) [has] come’.190

The Rebbe then comments in footnote 116 of the discourse that this prophecy is ‘Not

just in a form of a Wise Man and Judge but in a form of a Prophet. That this is literal

and actual.

The Rebbe as the Presumed Messiah — in his own words

It is not my intention in this dissertation to decide for or against, or cast aspersions

on, the claim that the Rebbe was or is the Potential Messiah, or might in the future be

the Actual Messiah, though from the evidence I have marshalled it is clear that he

himself fully believed these claims. I have in the previous chapters briefly discussed

the question of the unfolding of the messianic era and of the messianic personality. I

will now examine the statements that the Rebbe himself made with regard to his own

messianic status. As mentioned previously, the Rebbe’s flirtation with alluding to his

own messianic candidacy evolved and developed from the 1950s onwards, and

moved from subtle and implicit declarations to more pronounced and explicit ones.

In this section I will assemble the textual evidence in the Rebbe’s own edited

writings that confirms that he both implicitly and, more importantly, explicitly

expressed belief in his own messianic potential.

On the eve of Simchas Torah in 1985 the Rebbe, in explaining the idea that

‘the leader of the generation is the Moshiach of the generation’, stated that he was

189 Sefer HaSichos 5751 Volume 2, Shabbos Shoftim, p. 791. 190 Sefer HaSichos 5751 Volume 2, Shabbos Shoftim, p. 792.

104…the emissary of His Holiness my father-in-law… the leader of the generation — it is possible to add, that the letters of ‘sheliach’ (emissary), with an additional Yud, are numerically equal to ‘Moshiach’.

The Rebbe first and foremost saw himself as a sheliach (emissary) of the Previous

Rebbe, and a continuator of his father-in-law’s work. What the Rebbe is saying is

that not only is the Previous Rebbe the leader of the generation, and therefore the

Potential Moshiach of the generation, but that he as the Previous Rebbe’s sheliach is

also a Moshiach. Moreover, in real terms the Rebbe believes that he is Moshiach, and

that his own emissaries can also share in his magical status, if they dedicate

themselves entirely to the mission. He continues:

This means to say that ‘Moshiach’ is the leader of the generation (as explained above), and, therefore, just so is the ‘sheliach’, the emissary, of the leader of the generation (‘the emissary of a man is like him’), with the inclusion and addition of the ‘Yud’, the ten powers of the soul (this means that all ten powers of the soul are activated for the purpose of the mission) – that is how and when is revealed by him the aspect of the one who sent him, the ‘Moshiach’.191

This involvement of the whole personality of the sheliach in the task of fulfilling the

mission, reveals the Rebbe’s belief that the faculties of the human being are

inherently good, and if these ten powers of the soul are activated in the service and

fulfilment of the mission, then that individual not only becomes a real extension of

the one who sent him, but in a sense becomes a ‘mini-messiah’ himself. The

Previous Rebbe acts as the role model and source of the messiah and prophet figure,

from which the Rebbe receives his powers and status. The appeal here to the

Halachic principle that the status of the agent (sheliach) is the same as the status of

the one who sent him is noteworthy.

And this idea that the leader of the generation is ‘Moshiach’ … means literally, our righteous Moshiach, since this is the truth – that the leader of the generation is the Moshiach of the generation. And put simply the idea is that all leaders and shepherds of Israel in their own generation were the Moses of their generation, ‘the spreading of Moses in each and every generation’. Not only this but that all true Sages are called by the name ‘Moses’…and since Moses our teacher is also our righteous Moshiach, ‘the first redeemer is the last redeemer’.192

191 Sefer Hisvadius, Simchas Torah, 1985-5746--October 27 1985, pp. 342-43. 192 Sefer Hisvadius, Simchas Torah, 1985-5746--October 27 1985, pp. 342-43.

105The Rebbe explains that the leader of the generation is in fact the spark of the

soul of Moses within every generation. But for the Rebbe, Moses has messianic

significance: ‘the first redeemer is the last redeemer.’ Therefore, the Moses of each

generation is the potential Messiah of that generation. However, what the Rebbe is

also introducing here is a peculiarly Beshtian process of personal redemption.

We find that the leader of the generation, the Moses of the generation, is also our righteous Moshiach of the generation. And therefore when the leader of the generation sends out from himself an emissary (‘the emissary of a man is like [the man] himself’), and the emissary fulfils the mission, dedicating and giving with all his being the ten powers of his soul, then there is the existence of the emissary, the ‘Sheliach’, with the addition of the number ten (the ten powers of the soul) that makes ‘Moshiach’. This is when there is revealed the aspect of the one who sent, the ‘Moshiach’, and through this also actually is brought about the revelation of our righteous Moshiach literally. … The main mission of the leader of the generation is the spreading of wellsprings of Judaism outwards … including strengthening the belief in the coming of the Moshiach … the ‘a king will arise from the house of David etc’ — flesh and blood in this physical world, and ‘all who do not believe in him … do not believe the Torah of Moses our teacher…’193

Part of the mission of the emissaries is to spread abroad the wellsprings of Judaism

and, of course, Hasidic philosophy, but the Rebbe in the next part of the excerpt

stresses the centrality of the Messianic belief to the task of mission. Moreover, the

really radical thing that is being said in quoting Maimonides seemingly out of

context, is that not only is the Rebbe calling himself the Moses of the generation, and

therefore the Moshiach of the generation, but those that do not believe in him, in the

Rebbe who is the Moses of the generation, are in fact denying their belief in the

biblical Moses and therefore in the Torah of God. The Rebbe will later explain that

not only are his emissaries about to become ‘mini-messiahs’, but that in fact all Jews

are God’s own emissaries, and not only can they become ‘mini-messiahs’, but

arguably ‘mini-Gods’, if such a thing is possible.194

In 1987 the Rebbe introduced the idea of saying Yechi in connection with the

death of King David, and in 1988 he taught his followers something that would later

become one of the main sources of the post-Rebbe proclamation of Yechi, which

194 See footnote 31 here.

106seems to prophesy the future resurrection of the messianic king, as represented by

King David:

There needs to be an increase in life, through the action of the people who proclaim ‘Yechi Ha-Melech!’ [‘May the king live!’]. For the meaning of this proclamation is that the time has come for [the Resurrection, regarding which it states] ‘Awake and give praise, those who rest in the dust,’ that is, the Rebbe, my father-in-law, the leader of our generation, and up to and including the ‘rise up and sing’, that is, David King Moshiach!" 195

The point that needs to be grasped is that the ‘Yechi’ chant was the Rebbe’s own

invention. Although he may not have actually written or dictated the line, he

nonetheless was the first to place the idea in the minds of his followers, and then

eventually encourage them to sing it. Moreover, the Rebbe’s inclusion of the

Previous Rebbe just before the words ‘David King Moshiach’ fits the general theme

of the succession of the Previous Rebbe by the Rebbe himself, as I have discussed

elsewhere. The above-mentioned quotation is cited as evidence by the messianic

section of the Lubavitch movement, that not only did the Rebbe himself believe in

the possibility of a posthumous Messiah, but that this person could be different from

his father-in-law, and this shows that he could have believed in his own posthumous

messianic potential.196

Rosh Chodesh Av, 5749 - August 2, 1989, the Rebbe said: ‘“His name is

Menachem.” [May this certainly materialize] in such a way that “one points with his

finger” and exclaims, “Behold here he is! Here is Menachem, our righteous

Moshiach!”’

In 1990 at the start of the Gulf war, the Rebbe explained the meaning of a

passage in Yalkut Shemoni, Isaiah, 499:

Rabbi Yitzchak said: In the year the King Moshiach will be revealed, the kings of all the nations of the world will struggle with each other: the king of Persia will provoke the Arabian king; the Arabian king will go to Aram for advice. All the nations of the world will be in turmoil and terror; they will fall on their faces, seized by pains like the pangs of childbirth. Israel will also be in turmoil and terror, saying, ‘Where shall we come and where shall we go, where shall we come and where shall we go?’ [G-d] will say to them, ‘My

195 2nd of Nissan, 5748, ch. 5. March 20, 1988. 196 (Annonymous) And HE Will Redeem Us – Moshiach in Our Times. New York: Mendelsohn Press (1994).

107children, do not be afraid; all that I have done I have done only for your sake. Why are you afraid? Do not fear, the time for your Redemption has arrived. It will not be like the earlier Redemptions, this final Redemption, because suffering and subjection to other nations followed the earlier Redemptions. But the final Redemption will not be followed by any suffering and subjection to other nations.’

…Our Sages taught that when the King Moshiach comes he will stand on the roof of the Beis HaMikdosh [Holy Temple] and will proclaim to Israel, ‘Humble ones, the time for your Redemption has arrived!’

The Rebbe asked a very simple question about this Midrash: How is it at all possible

that the Temple will be built and the actual Messiah will stand on its roof, and only

then announce that the time of the Redemption has arrived, seeing that the building

of the Temple itself constitutes the historical start of the Redemption? Thus the

Rebbe concludes ‘This “roof of the Holy Temple” refers to the “miniature sanctuary”

of the Diaspora which substitutes for the Temple of Jerusalem.’ Thus the Midrash

must be describing an event prior to the actual Redemption, when the messianic

candidate announces the beginning of the Redemption, whilst standing not on the

actual roof of the Jerusalem Temple, but on a building that is the spiritual counterpart

of the roof of the Temple. 197

In the very same discourse, which can be found in the Appendix, the Rebbe

claims that the number 770, which is the street number of his synagogue, by which it

is generally known both inside and outside the movement, is numerically equivalent

to Beis Moshiach, the House of the Messiah,

Beis Rabeinu [‘the house of our Rebbe’] has the address ‘770’. Indeed, it has come to be called by the name ‘770’ by all Israel. This number is in fact the numerical value of [the Hebrew word] Poratzta [a Biblical word meaning ‘you have jumped out’]. Our rabbis interpret this to be a reference to Moshiach himself, as it states ‘the Poretz [jumper, one who breaks boundaries, said of Peretz, ancestor of the Moshiach] will rise up before us’.

It should be noted that ‘Beis Moshiach’ [‘House of Moshiach’] also possesses the same numerical value as Poratzta — 770.198

197 Kuntres Beis Rabeinu Shab'bavel (‘Miniature Temple’ see Appendix 2) Shabbos Chayei Soroh, 5751-November 10, 1990, footnote 38. 198 Kuntres Beis Rabeinu Shab'bavel (‘Miniature Temple’ see Appendix 2) Shabbos Chayei Soroh, 5751-November 10, 1990, footnote 38.

108The Rebbe then continues to explain that the roof of the temple is his own

synagogue, 770 Eastern Parkway, and that he is a prophet, and is announcing

‘Humble ones the time of your redemption has arrived!’

And since then… we are already ‘at the time of the arrival of Moshiach,’ (‘Behold, here he comes!’) ... and he is announcing to the Jewish people, ‘Humble ones, the time of your Redemption has arrived!’ 199

The logic is not difficult to follow, the message not hard to understand: the Rebbe is

saying that he is the Messiah, announcing the beginning of the Redemption, and he is

linking the Redemption with contemporary events, viz., the Gulf War, which he sees

as predicted in the Yalkut Shemoni (a point to which we shall return).

In 1991 the Rebbe said: ‘We should study the Likkutei Sichos of the leader of

the generation.’200 This is in reference to one of his own writings, since no work by

anyone else bearing this title seems to be known, or to have been circulating within

Chabad. What this is meant to imply is that, despite the Rebbe’s exceedingly humble

attitude towards the Previous Rebbe, he nonetheless clearly saw himself as the leader

of the generation, and thus, as mentioned earlier, as ‘the Moshiach of the

generation…’. Note again the statement quoted above: ‘And this idea that the leader

of the generation is the ‘Moshiach’, …means literally, our righteous Moshiach, since

this is the truth – that the leader of the generation is the Moshiach of the

generation.’201

The Rebbe wrote that the Hebrew word for ‘at once’ (myd), which he often

used in connection with the imminent redemption, was an acronym for Moshe,

Yisrael Baal Shem Tov and David King Moshiach. During the last months before his

first stroke202 the Rebbe repeated the previously mentioned Talmudic quotation that

the Moshiach's name is ‘Menachem.’ Although the Talmud offers several names for

Moshiach, this time the Rebbe left his audience in no doubt about which

‘Menachem’ he was referring to. He also reversed the order of the ‘MiYaD’

acronym, and explained it in generational terms as referring to the leadership of the

199 Sefer Ha Sichos 5751 Shabbos Naso, p. 595). 200 Shabbos Tazria-Metzora 5751-April 20, 1991. 201 Sefer Hisvadius 1985 pp. 342-343. 202 27th Adar 1, 5752 – (March 2, 1992).

109Lubavitch movement: Rabbi Dov (Baer), Yoseph Yitzchak, and Moshiach

(whose name is Menachem.).203

In short, then, the Rebbe could hardly have been more direct about his own

messianic claims. If the Messiah is:

� The Lubavitcher Rebbe of the generation,

� The seventh leader of the Chabad-Lubavitch movement, who directly

followed the Previous Rebbe,

� The individual who announces ‘Humble ones…’,

� The third in line after Rabbi Dov Baer and Yoseph Yitzchak

� The individual whose house is at 770 Eastern Parkway,

� Whose name is Menachem,

then there is clearly only one candidate! To make matters even clearer, the Rebbe on

occasions even said to his audience that ‘Moshiach is here in this room, in front of

you... all you have to do is open your eyes!’

The Rebbe’s Prophecies

I want now to return to the question of the relationship between the Messiah and

prophecy, on which, in a sense, the entire edifice of Lubavitch messianism rests, at

least from the Rebbe’s perspective. Maimonides maintains that Moshiach will be a

prophet whose prophetic ability will be close to the level of Moses, who ‘spoke to

God face to face’. However, some classic sources (quoted in Lubavitch literature),204

such as Midrash Tanchuma, suggest that Moshiach’s prophetic abilities will actually

surpass even those of Moses, to which all other prophecy has thus far been

subservient. The potential antinomianism of this view should not be missed. The

incomparability of Moses’ prophecy is a central pillar of Judaism — the idea that

there will never arise a prophet to equal him. This view is expressed in

uncompromising terms by Maimonides in his commentary on the Mishna, Sanhedrin

203 Sefer HaSichos Shabbos Mishpatim 5752 -February 1, 1992, footnote 148. 204 Sefer Hisvadiyot 5711, Last Day of Pesach.

11010 (the Thirteen Principles), and was obviously aimed at denying Christian (and

Muslim) claims that the Torah has been superseded by a superior revelation.205

There was a widespread belief within the Lubavitch movement that

The predictions of the Rebbe throughout his years of leadership were always fulfilled in their entirety. His words often seemed impossible and inconceivable, yet future events constantly unfolded as he said they would.206

This bold and uncompromising statement is designed to promote an epic sense of the

Rebbe’s prophetic abilities. However, such an unabashed claim is not the only voice

to be heard on this matter, for there is a section of a Lubavitch publication called To

Know and To Care that relates a series of events, predictions and advice that did not

turn out as the promoters of this claim might lead one to expect. Nevertheless, this

does not necessarily de-legitimize the validity of the Rebbe’s many accurate

predictions, which can be presented as quite impressive. These predictions seem

overwhelmingly associated with Israel and war, reflecting on the one hand the

Rebbe’s rather disturbing lifelong preoccupation with warfare, and on the other his

understandable ‘messianic concern’ with the State of Israel. Here are some examples

of his prophecies, quoted from the Lubavitch messianic publication Perceiving The

Redemption:207

The Six Day War At the outbreak of war, when Jews worldwide trembled and anticipated the worst, the Rebbe sent telegrams of support and faith. ‘Surely the Guardian of Israel will neither slumber nor sleep,’ he predicted. ‘They will report good news.’ He instructed overseas students to continue their studies in Israel, and not return home. ‘There is nothing to fear or to scare others,’ he wrote. Four days before the war was over, while speaking at a rally for children, the Rebbe promised a speedy victory.

Although this seems like a prediction, it can also be seen in a somewhat different

light, as an expression of supreme optimism — a radically positive and mystical

attempt to manipulate and determine the future of world events through his mystical

power and positive thinking. The verse, ‘Surely the Guardian of Israel neither

205 Again within the thinking of Chabad uncanny echoes can be heard of Christianity, with its age old claim that Jesus is ‘greater than Moses’. 206 Brod, Menachem Perceiving the Redemption (Pamphlet). Trans Elchonon Lesches. Israel:

Tzeirei Agudat Chabad, (1999). 207 Brod, Perceiving the Redemption pp. 8-9

111slumbers nor sleeps,’208 became a Lubavitch watchword, and was said in almost

all potentially dangerous situations that befell Israel and the Jewish people. In this

sense, the Rebbe is evoking God to fulfil this verse, as well as calming and assuring

people worldwide that events will work themselves out for the positive benefit of

Israel, the Jewish people and the world.

The next example that is cited to prove the Rebbe’s prophetic vision and

abilities is the Yom Kippur War:

The Yom Kippur War The Rebbe showed visible signs of agitation many months preceding the war. He periodically issued surprise directives that children gather at the Western Wall to ‘silence the foe and avenger’ (Psalms). In his traditional address on Yom Kippur, the Rebbe mentioned that ‘the Jewish people will be victorious in war’ – at the time when calm pervaded in the Holy Land. When the war began he predicted the Arabs would have a greater downfall than ever before.209

These signs of agitation and the surprising directives may have had nothing to do

with any foresight of an impending war. However, in retrospect it is easy to interpret

them as foretelling the Rebbe’s psychic foreknowledge of imminent, though still

hidden, events. If the truth were told, we will never really know whether this strange

behaviour was connected to the Rebbe’s spiritual insight, or was just the outcome of

an eccentric, mystical impulse. However, it was not difficult, especially for his

followers with their heightened susceptibilities, to see an inevitable correspondence

between the Rebbe’s subtly nuanced pronouncements and world events. Foresight

and premonition are a ‘gift’ which many great mystics have displayed to an uncanny

degree. But, of course, if the prediction is not literally fulfilled, believers always have

an alternative explanation ready to hand. Thus the Rebbe’s apparently clear

prediction of a war between Israel and the Arabs, if such a war had not actually

happened, could always have been spiritualized as referring to conflict in the unseen,

spirit world, to which ordinary mortals have no access. The prediction was made on

Yom Kippur, the Day of Judgement, when Satan, the Divine Prosecutor, delivers his

closing speech condemning Israel. If there had been no actual war, then the Rebbe’s

208 Psalm 121:4. 209 Brod, Perceiving the Redemption pp. 8-9.

112prediction could easily have been redirected towards claiming a spiritual victory

over the Accuser in the invisible, spiritual realm.

The Gulf War There was a marked difference between the positive, wishful thinking with

regard to the Six Day and Yom Kippur Wars, and the attitude that the Rebbe took

towards the next important war, the Gulf War. This did much to confirm his belief in

his own messianic status, and to legitimise his lone prophetic voice. No other war

figures so prominently in the Rebbe’s messianic talks and teachings. It was this war

that arguably finally convinced the Rebbe himself, and through him his followers,

that the messianic era was truly at hand and that he was bound eventually to be the

Messiah.

This war served to underscore the accuracy of the Rebbe’s words. He predicted that there would be absolutely no need for gas masks, dissuaded people from leaving Israel, and instructed tourists to continue visiting the land. Just before the outbreak of war he announced that the Jewish people would merit salvation. Indeed, the astonishing miracles that occurred during the war and the subsequent disarmament of Iraq serve as adequate testimony that all his predictions were entirely fulfilled.210

Rabbi Leibl Groner the Rebbe's secretary anecdotally retells the event, which was

subsequently understood to have been a prophecy. When asked by an army general

whether he needed to take his Megilla for Purim, the Rebbe is said to have answered,

No, thus pointing to the war ending before Purim, which it did on Erev Purim. It is

claimed that he said:

"I was standing next to the Rebbe at the time. Goldstein told the Rebbe he was being sent to the Gulf and was taking along a megillah for Purim. The Rebbe looked surprised and asked, "What do you need a megillah for?"

Confused, Goldstein mumbled something about the fact that there are Jews there who need to hear the reading of the Book of Esther on Purim. The Rebbe told him, “By Purim you will be in a place where there will be plenty of megillahs and you certainly won't need one.”211

210 Brod, Perceiving the Redemption, pp. 8-9. 211 Do (Normal) Jews Believe in Prophesy? By Rabbi Tzvi Freedman http://www.chabad.org/library/article.asp?AID=75574 (07/12/2005).

113The Gulf War was more than just a chapter in the Rebbe’s messianism.

Intriguingly the clearly messianic interpretation of this war was not at first apparent

to the Rebbe himself, but rather is said to have been pointed out to him by a member

of his community, who drew his attention to the striking similarity between the

contemporary events in the Middle East and the paragraph in Yalkut Shemoni

mentioned above.212 This was like adding paraffin to the fire. The messianic

significance that the Gulf War would assume was to play a central role in generating

enthusiastic support for the Rebbe’s messianic campaign. It seems that whatever

doubts or reservations the Rebbe may have had up to that point with regard to his

potential as a messianic candidate were swept away in an unprecedented messianic

upsurge that would continue to increase till his first stroke on the 27th of Adar 5752 -

1992. The psychology here is interesting, and convincing. It reminds one inevitably

of Shabbetai Zvi, who although he had experienced stirrings of a messianic

consciousness, remained deeply uncertain of his messianic vocation, until his

follower and ‘prophet’, Nathan of Gaza ‘demonstrated’ it to him.213 For the Rebbe

the parallelism between Yalkut and the unfolding events of the Gulf War may have

come as a moment of blinding disclosure and confirmation. The Yalkut passage may

have been suggested by the Hasid, but the reading of himself and 770 Eastern

Parkway into the prediction has surely all the hallmarks of the Rebbe himself.

The Killing of Stalin and the Collapse of Communism

The Rebbe having been born in Russia under communist oppression, saw his

father-in-law lose his ability to walk because of the torture he underwent during

communist ‘interviews’. His parents were sent to Siberia, after being repeatedly

tortured over many years. The Rebbe avoided ever mentioning the word ‘Russia’, but

rather referred to ‘that country’, and it was widely believed within the movement that

he even caused the death of Stalin, with the combined power of his words and those

of the community at a Hasidic gathering, on the Shabbat of Purim 1953, when they

all chanted ‘Hoo Ra! Hoo Ra! Hoo Ra!’.214 This sounded like the common

212 Yalkut Shemoni, Yeshayahu, 499. Rabbi Y.Y. Kassen posted the first part of the Yalkut on the wall of the corridor that the Rebbe passed every day to go from his office to the public synagogue area of 770. The Rebbe stopped and pointed to it and suggested that the continuation of the Yalkut (which mentions Moshiach) be added and publicised throughout the world. 213 Scholem, Gershom, Shabbetai Zevi: The Mystical Messiah, 1626-1676. Primcetom: Princeton University Press (1976). 214 Sefer Hisvadiyos, Sicha Shabbos Purim 5713.

114expression of joy and elation, but could be interpreted as Hebrew for ‘He is Evil!

He is Evil! He is Evil!’. At this very same moment, thousands of miles away, on the

6th of March 1953 Stalin died. Thus the Rebbe was able to demonstrate the prophetic

gift of being able to kill with the power of his words, even at a distance.

Later the total collapse of Communism was seen as an important milestone

by the Rebbe’s followers, and it triggered a whole range of messianic claims and

associations. In 1985, prior to its actual downfall, the Rebbe asked one of his

emissaries to talk to Michael Gorbachev about his plans for political reform. This

emissary, so the story goes, was unable to meet Gorbachev until 1988, after he had

begun the programme of Glasnost and Perestroika. Gorbachev was reportedly

shocked by what the emissary had to say, because until 1987 he ‘hadn’t planned any

political reforms at all’.215 Later on in that same year,

The Rebbe called upon the Israeli government to prepare for an unprecedented wave of immigrants from Russia, warning them of the need to construct more housing and to establish business centers. He also initiated the construction of a new neighbourhood in Jerusalem with world facilities ‘for the new immigrants’. At the time, no one understood his directives but of course, his predictions materialised.216

What appears now like commonsense advice was at the time actually ignored by the

Israeli government, because they thought that it was unlikely that Russia would

release any of its Refuseniks, let alone millions of Russian Jews. It seemed unlikely

that some old rabbi in Brooklyn would have better intelligence about Russia’s

political situation and intentions than the Israeli government. Thus only a handful of

buildings were constructed and mainly by followers of the Rebbe and/or Lubavitch

sympathisers. The downfall of Russian Communism was hailed as a victory for the

Lubavitch movement, which over seventy long years had withstood, continued

persecution and religious oppression at the hands of the Communists. This was seen

as a personal triumph for the Rebbe and his predecessor over Russia, for religion

over atheism, for spirit over matter, for will over force. It also fitted in very well with

the Rebbe’s messianic persona.

215 http://rebbe.chabadonline.com/life/timeline/1989.html (23/12/03). 216 Brod, Perceiving the Redemption p. 9.

115It is deeply entrenched within tradition that the Messiah will be a warrior,

who will defeat his own personal enemy and the enemies of Israel (the anti-Messiah,

or anti-Christ, usually known as Armillus, and the nations whom he leads). As we

have seen above the Rebbe might be interpreted as playing that warrior role (with

Stalin cast as Armillus), not on the actual field of battle, but by taking on and

defeating in the spiritual realm the spiritual and ideological forces ranged against

him, and eventually contributing to the collapse of communism and by bringing

about a massive ingathering of the exiles.

In 1990 there was a marked ‘change of gear’ in the messianic fervour within

the movement:

In 1990 the Rebbe foresaw wondrous events and spoke of the need to prepare for these miracles, naming the Jewish year 5750 as ‘A Year of Wonders’. He even termed them as ‘miracles the entire world will witness’. When these drastic upheavals transpired, he noted that unlike such events in the past, these events would occur without bloodshed.’217

It is also interesting to note that this coincides with the Rebbe’s assertion that ‘this is

the year (1990) that the king Messiah is/was revealed,’ on the basis of a passage from

Yalkut Shemoni, Vayikra Rabba, and that ‘this is the year of “I will show you

wonders”,’ — an allusion to the well-established parallelism between the going out

from Egypt and the beginning of the messianic era.218

We tend to think of Moshiach in simplistic, childish terms. A thorough study of teachings discussing the Redemption indicates our time as the threshold of a new era, poised in the preparatory stages of a great revelation. … Recent world events indicate that the foundation for Moshiach’s revelation is being prepared.219

What will Moshiach do upon his arrival? He will gather his scattered people to the

Holy Land. He will direct mankind to a pure, virtuous and moral life. Warring

nations will lay down their arms, and divisiveness will be transformed into unity. He

will teach the world to recognize and accept monotheism. The world, it is claimed,

217 Brod, Perceiving the Redemption p. 9. 218 Talmud Berachos 12b, Talmud Pesachim 118a. Isaiah 11:11-16. Jeremiah 23:7-8. Bereishis Rabba 16:4, Zohar II:216b-217a, Sefer Ba'al Shem Tov, Bereishis, par. 166 and note 143; ibid., Shemos par. 5-6, and note 4. 219 Brod, Perceiving the Redemption p. 7.

116has lately become more receptive to these ideas. Beginning from the year 1990,

there have been tremendous upheavals in all corners of the world. Radical changes

have occurred suddenly, and taken political leaders and pundits by surprise. All these

events combine to present to a particular type of religious mentality the picture of a

world startlingly close to the Redemption, as predicted in the great classic scenarios

of the end.220

Present spiritualization v. the miraculous future

Maimonides’ picture of the messianic age does not notably involve miracles. Like

many of his views it is extremely rational, and envisages a very naturalistic

emergence of the messianic leader, and a non-miraculous unfolding of his times.221

However, other traditions foresee a more miraculous and out-of-the-ordinary chain of

messianic events. Many Prophetic, Talmudic, Zoharic and Midrashic narratives

describe the inauguration of the messianic era as marked by supernatural

happenings,222 such as the arrival of Elijah the Prophet,223 the divine blowing of the

Great Shofar three days before the Messiah’s arrival,224 the ingathering of the

exiles,225 the uprooting of Jewish houses, buildings and people, and their

transportation on clouds towards the Holy Land, the heavenly descent of the Third

Temple,226 the planting of all of the synagogues and study halls alongside the

Jerusalem Temple,227 the three-story rebuilding of Jerusalem,228 the resurrection of a

220 Interestingly these same world events were read in the same way by Christian millenarians of whom there were many in the United States, waiting for the imminent Second Coming of Christ. See: Jeffrey Kaplan, Radical Religion in America: Millennarian Movements from the Far Right to the Children of Noah. Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press, (1997). Robbins and Palmer (eds.), Millennium, Messiahs, and Mayhem: Contemporary Apocalyptic Movements. New York: Routledge, (1997). Philip Melling, Fundamentalism in America: Millennialism, Identity and Militant Religion. Chicago : Fitzroy Dearborn, (1999). 221 Maimonides Hilchot Melachim 12:1-5; and cf. Hilchot Teshuvah 9:2, Perush HaMishnah, Introduction to Sanhedrin ch. 10 and Netzach Yisrael , ch. 42. Also see, Talmud Berachoth 34b. Also see Boteach, Rabbi Shmuel. The Wolf Shall Lie with the Lamb: The Messiah in Hasidic Thought. Pennsylvania: Jason Aronson (1993), pp. 233-242. 222 Isaiah 11:6-9, 65:25, Talmud Kethuboth 111b-112b, Genesis Rabbah 20:56 223 Malachi 3:23; Talmud Erubin 43b, Maimonides Hilchot Melachim 224 Isaiah 27:13, Zecharia 9:14, Joel 2:1, Zephania 1:16, Daily Liturgy, Siddur Tehillas HaShem, p. 55, Soncino Zohar, Bereshith, Section 1, p. 13b, Genesis Rabbah. 498 225 Deuteronomy 30:4, Ezekiel 16:53, Jeremiah 29:13, Zephania 3:20, Lamentations 2:14. Talmud Megillah 17b, Zevachim 116a, Maimonides Hilchot Melachim 11:4. 226 Rashi on Sukkah 41a, Rosh Ha Shanah 30a, Tosafos Sukkah 41a; also Touger, Rabbi Eliyahu, Seek out the Welfare of Jerusalem, New York: Sichos in English. (1994) pp. 145-149. 227 Sefer Ha Sichos 5752 volume 2, p. 467 see Appendix 2 228 Pesikta Rabbati 36:2, Midrash Rabba, Song of Songs 7:11 286; also see: Sifrei, Devarim 1.

117select few229 as forerunners of the general resurrection, the visible manifestation

of the words of God230 ‘that create and give life to the world’, inanimate objects

being able to speak,231 and other such signs and wonders.232 There is a long and

varied tradition of these miraculous eschatological scenarios within Judaism, going

all the way back to the apocalyptic movement of Second Temple times. And even

Maimonides himself seems implicitly to contradict his own drawn out, rational,

naturalistic scenario by stating in his Thirteen Principles ‘… the Messiah will come;

though he may tarry I await his coming every day, that he may come’.233 This, which

chimes in with other passages from his writings, has been taken to imply that

Maimonides also believed in a miraculous and immediate revelation of the Messiah

and the messianic era. These contradictory positions are usually reconciled by

arguing that the realization of the miraculous scenario is dependent on the merit of

the Jewish people, whereas the non-miraculous scenario is, so to speak, the default

scenario, that will come to pass if the Jewish people have not merited the miraculous

one. There are subtly nuanced variations of this basic eschatology that the Rebbe

creatively exploits. He expresses a variety of innovative and contradictory views

with regard to both the unfolding of the messianic era and also the emergence of the

messianic leader, combining deftly the natural and the supernatural messianic

scenarios. The natural is usually invoked to prove that he, as the messianic candidate,

does not need to do any miracles, and that he is, by definition, the Presumed

Messiah. The supernatural scenario is either spiritualised, or is said to be about to

happen literally in its full technicolor splendour in the imminent messianic

revelation.

229 Midrash Chachamim, chapter 7, Zohar III, 3, Aruch LeNer on Niddah 61b, and on Sanhedrin 90b. 230 Tanya, Likutei Amarim. chapters 36-37. Igeret HaKodesh chapters 4 and 26 . 231 Midrash Shocher Tov 73. 232 Soncino Zohar, Bereshis, Section 1, pp. 72b, and 117a, and Zohar, Shemos, Section 2, pp. 7b, 8a, 34b, and Midrash Alfa Beisos, chapter 6. 233 I am aware that this is the Ani Ma’amin formulation of Maimonides Twelfth Principle, but it is widely regarded as an accurate summary of his point of view. Interestingly Maimonides himself in his full formulation does not imply that the Messiah could come today. What he says is: ‘We should believe and affirm that the Messiah will come, and should not consider him tardy. Should he tarry, “wait for him” (Habakkuk 2:13). No date may be fixed for his appearance, nor may the Scriptures be interpreted in such a way as to derive from them the time of his coming. The Sages have said: “May the wits of those who calculate the end be blasted!” (Talmud, Sanhedrin 97b). We should have firm faith in him, honouring and loving him, and praying for his coming, in accordance with what has been said about him by all the prophets from Moses to Malachi. Whoever has doubts about him, or makes light of his authority, contradicts the Torah, which clearly promises his coming in the parshah of Balaam (Numbers 22:2-25:9), and in the parshah of Nitzavim (Deuteronomy 29:9-30:20). A general consequence of this principle is that Israel cannot have a king who is not descended from David, and, more particularly from Solomon. Whoever disputes the authority of this dynasty denies God and the words of his prophets.’

118

Elijah the Prophet

Traditionally there is a belief, based on the Midrash,234 that Elijah the Prophet

will visit the Sanhedrin in Tiberias in order to announce the arrival of the Messiah

one day before his coming. The Rebbe contrasts this with Maimonides’ statement of

faith that he waits for the Messiah’s coming every day, implying that he could come

even today. The Rebbe explores this seeming contradiction, and explains that since

we are forced to believe that the Messiah can come even today, we must logically

conclude that in some way or other, perhaps unknown to us, Elijah the Prophet has

already appeared and announced his coming in advance of his arrival, and that

‘yesterday’ such an announcement was made.

‘Here he [Moshiach] comes’ (Song of Songs 2.8), and ‘Behold, this is our God … this is the Lord for whom we hoped!’ (Isaiah 25.9) — note that the word ‘this’ [indicating a clear recognition] is mentioned twice — and ‘Behold David the Anointed King’ [the Moshiach is here]. Therefore Elijah the Prophet has already appeared a day earlier in Tiberias to announce the arrival of our righteous Moshiach. It may be suggested that, since Moshiach can come any day –‘I await his coming every day’ – and since Elijah the Prophet must announce Moshiach’s arrival the day before, that therefore Elijah the Prophet actually comes every day to Tiberias and announces the coming of Moshiach. The announcement is directed particularly to those who put themselves in a position of ‘I await his coming every day’, even though (as is the custom of Chabad) they do not actually articulate this verbally, but only think about it. [The announcement is made specifically to us] when we recite … from the well-known Psalm, the verse: ‘I have found My servant David, I have anointed him with My holy oil’ (Psalm 89.21). 235

By claiming ‘The announcement is directed particularly to those who put themselves

in a position of ‘I await his coming every day’, the Rebbe is suggesting that the

Sanhedrin in Tiberias may not mean geographically in Tiberias, and that in addition

the Midrash does not mean a real and Halachic Sanhedrin, but rather those who

might be members of the Sanhedrin if it actually existed. Thus Elijah the Prophet in

theory may visit the Sanhedrin every day to announce the Messiah’s arrival.

Additionally he is arguing that those who disagree with his interpretation of

Maimonides which claims a Jew must anticipate the messiah’s arrival every moment

234 Midrash Rabba, Genesis 906 235 Sefer HaSichos 5752, pp. 37-38 (Translation from Besuras Hageulo, pp. 6-7).

119of the day are therefore not members of this pre-redemption Sanhedrin. The

Rebbe uses a similar type of logic to deal with the tradition that states that a mythical

ram’s horn will blow continuously for three days before the Messiah’s arrival. He

suggests that since it is God who blows the horn, it is only those spiritually sensitive

enough who can hear it, and he comments that the idea here is similar to that

regarding Elijah’s visit to the Sanhedrin: it is only those who are spiritually attuned

who can see and hear Elijah the Prophet announcing the coming of the Messiah.

The Messiah arriving on a donkey

The Rebbe does not understand the verse stating that ‘the Messiah will come

lowly and riding on a donkey’ (Zechariah 9.9) literally. Rather he connects the

Hebrew word for donkey, chamor by an al tikrei with the Hebrew word for coarse,

physical matter or substance, chomer. Thus the Messiah rides in on the back of

immense innovations in man’s scientific understanding of the material world, and on

his ability technologically to control it. The Messiah metaphorically ‘rides on the

back of a donkey (=materiality),’ that is, the messianic era will be brought closer

through the unprecedented manifestation of God within the physical world — a point

which we will explore later.

The heavenly descent of the Third Temple

There is much debate as to just how and where the Third Temple will be

built, and who will build it. On the one hand the Rebbe explains that in our times,

that is, in this day and age, all the Jewish people are obligated literally to build the

Third Temple. Yet on the other he seems to imply that the Third Temple will

descend from Heaven ready made, and all that will need to be done is for the

Messiah to put the doors on it. One perspective is natural and historical, the other

miraculous, and this may reflect the two types of redemption, one natural and the

other supernatural, which I mentioned earlier. The Rebbe claims that the first place

where the supernatural heavenly temple will become manifest is at 770 Eastern

Parkway, Brooklyn New York (see the The House of our Rebbe in Exile in the

appendix). One way to reconcile this contradiction is to spiritualize the Temple and

the obligation to build it, and to state that good deeds add to the building of the

spiritual Temple which will descend from heaven.

120

Visions of the Future

Together with the heavenly descent of the third Jerusalem Temple, the Rebbe

envisions, as mentioned above, the resurrection of a select few236 prior to the

resurrection of all of the Jewish people and all righteous gentiles, which will occur at

the same time, or even just before, the heavenly descent of the Temple. At the same

time, as we saw, Jewish houses, buildings and people will be uprooted from where

they are in exile, and will be carried on clouds towards the Holy Land and Jerusalem,

and all the synagogues and study halls will be planted alongside the Jerusalem

Temple, as a result of which Jerusalem will be three times as big as it was.

The Rebbe as the Actual Messiah?

It seems that claiming that he was the Potential Messiah may not have been the limit

of the Rebbe’s messianic aspirations, for in the same discourse mentioned above he

discloses a desire that could deeply complicate the story told so far. On the 17th of

Ellul 5747-1987, due to the great success of his emissaries around the world and the

exponential growth of his movement, there were plans to transform 770 Eastern

Parkway, the Rebbe’s synagogue, from a small rundown hall into a vast, almost

palatial building, on the inside. The Rebbe set about laying the foundation stone for a

new extension, and ultimately what was planned to be an expansion of the existing

synagogue. Now 88 years old, he was adamant that he must lift and place the

foundation stone by himself, without the help of his secretariat. Sponsors and

dignitaries were there; the press and a gathering of followers looked on. Later that

day the Rebbe talked about the importance of building and expanding all Jewish

institutions and activities, and encouraged his followers to donate to the continued

building of his synagogue, which they did. Work would continue for many years

afterwards, with the Hasidim each pledging $770. But the initial plans were scrapped

soon after the Rebbe had his first stroke, and the donated monies eventually

vanished.237

236 Midrash Chachamim chapter 7, Zohar III, 3, Aruch LeNer on Niddah 61b, and on Sanhedrin 90b. 237 Unfortunately, they never seem to have reached their intended goal and in effect only added only a small, extended area for prayer and a rather large underground toilet area.

121However, in 1992 this stone setting, which occured several years earlier,

took on a radically new symbolic meaning. Maimonides writes in Hilchot Melachim

12:5 that what marks off the Actual Messiah from the Presumed Messiah is that the

former actually rebuilds the Temple.

If he does so and is successful, and is victorious over all the nations that surround him, and builds [the] Sanctuary in its/his place, and gathers the dispersed of Israel – behold this [person] is definitely Moshiach…

The Rebbe in a footnote238 deliberately confuses the Halachic issue here, and,

blurring by inference the neat classical distinction between the Presumed and the

Actual Messiah, and using the term remez,239 he says that it would be possible to

claim that he was the Actual Messiah, even though the Jerusalem Temple had not yet

been manifest. He does this by offering an extremely detailed analysis of the

Maimonides quotation. Maimonides says, ‘if he builds the temple bimkomo’. This

could mean ‘in its place’, i.e., in Jerusalem, but it is also possible to translate ‘in his

place’, that is in the place where the Messiah currently is, outside the Land of Israel,

viz., in Brooklyn New York Therefore the Rebbe’s laying of the foundation stone of

his own synagogue, represents the building of a miniature Temple in the Diaspora,

and thus by this act he may actually have passed from being the Potential to being

the Actual Messiah.

The Rebbe seems to rule in opposition to Maimonides on two points: firstly,

he regards it as possible that a potential messianic candidate could continue to have

this status even after his death. This he believed was the case with regard to his own

father-in-law. Secondly, he toys with a radically spiritualised reinterpretation of the

meaning of ‘he builds the sanctuary in its place’, and flirts with the possibility that

the Potential Messiah could become the Actual Messiah without having to build the

Third Jerusalem Temple. This is a hotly debated point, which, if conceded, would

238 See Appedix 2 part 4-5 (below) Schneerson, Sefer HaSichos 5752, Volume 2. pp. 468ff, and 34-38 “And according to this is made clear the difference between the beginning of the chapter and its end –that in the beginning of the chapter is written the law that ‘King Moshiach …builds the Temple’ (simply [and] literally), which is not the case in its end. This explains how the identity of the King Moshiach (Melech HaMoshiach), the b’chezchas Moshiach (‘the potential Moshiach’), who precedes the Moshiach Vaadi (‘actual Moshiach’), will be established, as it is written ‘if he does this and is successful and builds the Temple in his place’, that among his activities in the time of exile is also included the building of the miniature Temple in Exile, as a preparation and beginnings of the revelation of the future Temple.” 239 Schneerson, Sefer HaSichos 5752, Volume 2, p. 468.

122significantly undermine the previously clear distinction between the Potential

Messiah and the Actual Messiah. One possible solution is to suppose that the

Rebbe’s deliberately bold and unabashed misappropriation of the text was to create

yet another category between the Potential Messiah and the Actual Messiah, viz., the

Potential Messiah who has been manifested as the Actual Messiah, before he has

fulfilled all the conditions of being the Actual Messiah. That is to say, in the

personality and actions of the Presumed Messiah are to be found clear anticipations

of his future role as the Actual Messiah, signs that he is unquestionably destined to

become the Actual Messiah. It is hard to be sure whether or not the Rebbe was

simply having fun with this text. Such remozim should not, it might be argued, be

taken too seriously. He was simply showing off his ability to play with traditional

sources. Or was he making a serious and potentially explosive claim that he was not

merely a Potential Messiah, but that he had already given unequivocal proof that he

was the Actual Messiah? Not for the first time would the Rebbe’s messianic claims

be stated in tantalisingly ambiguous terms.

123

Chapter 7

Atzmus and the Theology of Lubavitch Messianism

The Rebbe as a Hasidic theologian of Messianism

So far we have looked at the evidence that the Rebbe claimed messianic status, and

that his followers recognized him as Messiah. In this chapter we turn from his

charismatic personality to his messianic theology. It is worth reiterating here a point

made elsewhere, namely that the Rebbe was not just a charismatic messianic leader,

like Shabbetai Zvi.240 He was also, unlike Shabbetai Zvi, a profound thinker and

theologian in his own right. His theology is fundamentally messianic in character,

and it was this that shaped and drove forward his messianic agenda. Central to his

messianic theology is the concept of the disclosure of Atzmus, the Essence of God.

His theology is intrinsically teleological and eschatological: in its purest form it

describes the nature of God and of the World in its ultimately redeemed state, a

World whose telos is the revelation of Atzmus. However, in talking about and

describing the nature of Atzmus and the World to Come, the Rebbe was in a sense

envisaging the possibility of realising to some degree the eschaton here and now. His

theology can be summed up in three propositions: First, the telos of the world is the

revelation of Atzmus. Second, that final revelation can be anticipated here and now;

the eschaton is not some state that lies totally beyond our present experience, but can

be experienced to a significant degree here and now. In fact, the process of

redemption begins with this realisation of the eschaton in the lives of individuals.

Third, the fundamental role of the Messiah is to proclaim this truth. As in

Gnosticism, redemption is first and foremost noetic. The Messiah (that is to say,

himself) plays the role of a Gnostic redeemer, bringing a saving gnosis to

humankind, though unlike Gnosticism the content of that gnosis does not concern the

duality of the world and the evil of matter, but the unity of the world and the divinity

of matter.

240 Scholem, Gershom. Sabbatai Sevi, the Mystical Messiah. Trans. R.J. Zwi Werblowsky. New Jersey: Princeton University Press. (1973), pp. 123, 126, 251, 487.

124It must be said that the Rebbe’s messianic theology is not solely his own

invention. Many of his ideas about Atzmus discussed in this chapter, ideas which

seem so characteristic of his thought, are actually found in various earlier sources

representing the whole gamut of Chabad-Hasidic philosophy, and particularly in the

writings of the Rebbe Rashab, to whom the Rebbe makes extensive reference. And

cognate ideas, such as the notion that ‘the created self is the true self’, which may

seem too radical to be anybody’s but the Rebbe’s, can, in fact, be traced back as early

as the Rebbe Maharash, who also makes the unprecedented claim that the physical

world itself is Or Ein Sof. Although not conspicuously deviating from the theology

of his predecessors, as this was generally understood, the Rebbe nevertheless, in the

manner in which he brought together and seamlessly fused disparate ideas from

within Hasidic thought, created a radical new synthesis, with a new focus and

emphasis. The Rebbe’s ideas are, broadly speaking, extant in some form or other in

earlier Hasidic texts, but this should not blind us to the fact that the way in which he

brought these ideas to the fore and developed them, required great intellectual

originality and ingenuity.

Chabad is a ferociously intellectual tradition, which has created its own

complex theology, expressed in a highly technical vocabulary that is esoteric even

within the tradition of Kabbalah and Jewish philosophy. It is not easy to expound this

philosophy to the outsider in standard philosophical or theological language. Chabad

may use apparently common philosophical terms (such as ‘essence’), but what it

means by these cannot always be correlated with standard philosophical definitions.

Its philosophy is full of paradox and apparent contradiction. Its modes of reasoning

are confusing, perhaps deliberately so. It is full of rhetoric aimed more, perhaps, at

expressing religious insights and wisdom than at hard-edged philosophical

propositions in the generally accepted sense. To ‘translate’ it into language that can

be understood in the academy is not at all easy.

Despite the fact that the Rebbe himself talks frequently about Atzmus, and it

is one of the defining concepts of his thinking, speaking about it has generally been

treated as taboo within the Lubavitch movement. Attempting to define an

unknowable ‘essence’ is bound to be complicated and problematic, especially since

the proponents of this theology claim that all the resources of human language and

human logic, including paradox and negative theology, fall far short of the task. They

125maintain, reasonably, that it is impossible to define something that is indefinable,

and would try to silence or censor anyone who might be tempted to do so. An

example of such censorship, based on the deeply held belief that Atzmus should not,

and indeed cannot, be talked about, is told by Rabbi Levi Yitzchak Ginsberg,

Mashpia, Yeshiva Tomchei T’mimim – Lubavitch Kfar Chabad, in the following

story:

During his final years, R. Zalman Moshe [HaYitzchaki] emigrated to Eretz Yisroel. He lived in Tel Aviv and davened and farbrenged in the Chabad Shul on Nachlat Binyamin Street. One of the more outstanding elderly chassidim in Eretz Yisroel was R. Moshe Gurary, of blessed memory. R. Moshe was considered one of the leading scholars in chassidus, and whoever had a question in chassidus would turn to him. Once R. Zalman Moshe sat at a chassidishe farbrengen on Nachlat Binyamin Street. Thus, as we see the ‘good-heartedness of the king in wine,’ he clung to R. Moshe Gurary and demanded of him, ‘You are a “scholar.” Tell me, what is the atmzus umehus (essence and being)?’ R. Moshe tried to evade the question, ‘What can one possibly say about Atzmus?’ But R. Zalman Moshe was unrelenting, and said, to the point of almost yelling, ‘Don’t try to avoid the issue? You are a “scholar” and it is your obligation to explain when you are asked! You can bring whatever amazing bits of knowledge you wish from whatever angle and say that in effect it is impossible to say anything accurately on the matter, but you must tell us, what is Atzmus.’ Finally, R. Moshe opened his mouth and tried to explain something. But, at that moment, R. Zalman Moshe immediately turned to him again and gave a playful slap. He then said, ‘Listen, my brother, if you can speak and explain, even if the explanation is inexplicable, and if what you say can not really be said, the mere fact that it is possible to say something — that’s already not Atzmus!’ 241

However, despite this, the simple fact remains that the Rebbe and his

predecessors discussed the idea at length, within the context of their Hasidic

philosophy, and have left behind, paradoxically, a plethora of pronouncements on the

nature of the ‘unknowable’ Essence of God, called Atzmus. So much can be said

about the subject.

The Laws of Etzem in Hasidic thought

My purpose, then, in this chapter is to examine the Rebbe’s ideas of Atzmus in the

context of his own messianic beliefs and expectations. I do not propose to spend

much time comparing and contrasting the various theories of Atzmus that have arisen

241 Translated by Michoel Dobry, http://www.beismoshiach.org/Ginsberg/ginsberg351.htm (12/12/03).

126in the history of the Chabad-Lubavitch thought, though some of these will be

mentioned in passing. We begin with some basic linguistic facts. The word Atzmus is

derived from the noun etzem, which has the basic meaning of ‘bone’. It is in this

sense that it is found in Exodus 13:9, where it denotes the ‘bones’ of Joseph which

Moses brought with the Israelites up out of Egypt. Another interesting biblical

occurrence is Genesis 2:23, where Adam, expressing his newfound awareness of

Eve, describes her as etzem me-atzamai, ‘bone of my bones’. It can also mean ‘self’:

a folk-etymology (scientifically incorrect) links the word etzem to etz, meaning

‘tree’, and sees an analogy between a tree and the tree-like skeletal structure of the

human body.242 Thus etzem is the structure or foundation on which the selfhood or

identity of a person or thing rests. Likewise, although its primary biblical sense is

bone, etzem also has come to mean ‘core’ or ‘marrow’, and was employed to express

the ideas of core-ness, being, essence, substance, as well as self, independence and

identity. From this usage was derived the Modern Hebrew abstract noun Atzmaut as

in Yom HaAtzmaut, ‘Independence Day’. The mediaeval Jewish philosophers pressed

the term etzem into service to represent the range of ideas expressed in the Greek

philosophical tradition by ‘essence’ or ‘substance’. Maimonides uses it in reference

to the selfhood of the Divine, describing God as Metzius me’atzmuso, ‘Existence

unto Himself’.

Rabbi Faitel Levin is only stating the obvious when he says that ‘the term

Etzem has a tradition; it has meaning associated with it long before Chassidus’ 243

Before discussing the Rebbe’s concept of Atzmus we need to understand something

of the earlier Hasidic and Kabbalistic ideas of ‘essence’. Etzem and Atzmus, which

may often seem to be synonymous and indistinguishable, are in fact subtly different,

and this difference has significant theological ramifications. Etzem in the context of

Hasidic philosophy refers to and points towards the hidden essence, core or source of

any particular thing. It is the name for the deepest level within the individual entity,

or the profoundest aspect of any part of the hierarchy of spiritual worlds. Essence in

Hasidic thought is generally understood to have a number of defining characteristics.

These ‘laws of Essence’ are fundamental to Chabad-Hasidic metaphysics, and cannot

be broken. They apply to every Essence, and define the nature of Etzem and, at least

in principle, Atzmus.

242 Ginsburg, Yitzchak (Kabbalist) http://www.inner.org/worlds/atzmut.htm 243 Levin, Heaven on Earth pp. 146-7.

127

1. kol Etzem bilti mischalek — no essence is divisible.

2. kol Etzem bilti mispashet — no essence has extension (literally, spreads

itself).244

3. kol Etzem bilti mishtana — no essence undergoes change.

4. kol Etzem bilti misgale — no essence reveals itself.245

This concept of Essence performs an important role in the metaphysics of Chabad. In

Kabbalah the world seems to be infinitely divisible, infinitely layered. The

metaphysical universes can always, it seems, be described in terms of higher and

lower levels of divine manifestation, of deeper and more superficial aspects. Not

only does each sphere have an inner and outer aspect, and a relationship to others,

but it can also contain aspects of the other spheres within it. The concept of Essence

asserts that there is a point at which this divisibility must stop. It cannot go on

indefinitely. There must exist a level which cannot be further atomized, an ‘unmoved

mover’ in the Seder Hishtalshlus, and this is Essence. Essence cannot be

characterized in terms of inner and outer, higher and lower, deeper and more

superficial. Inherent in Kabbalistic and Hasidic philosophy was the profound danger

of falling into an infinite regress. As the philosophers and mystics explored the

nature of the Godhead, the metaphysical universes, and the Seder Hishtalshlus, they

continued to postulate ever deeper levels of being. Having found a ‘cause’ they

turned into the ‘effect’ of a still more ultimate ‘cause’. Having found an ‘essence’,

they turned into an ‘accident’ of a still more ultimate ‘essence’. If this process had

gone on unchecked, the boundaries of the unknown would have been pushed further

and further into abstraction, and the system would have become meaningless.

Essence represents the ultimate boundary which cannot be crossed. The implication

appears to be that Etzem is qualitatively different from that which is ‘not-essence’.

All this is rather clearly expressed in the four ‘laws of Essence’ listed above.

The first law, kol Etzem bilti mischalek (no essence is divisible), is an attempt to stop

endless Hasidic and Kabbalistic deconstruction of the Godhead, through the

244 Dafin. Demystifying the Mystical, p. 55; also see, Mishnat Habad Volume 1 (Hebrew) by Rabbi

Moshe Laib Miller Israel (published by the Author: 1995), who cites two works by the Rebbe Rashab, 5672–1912, p. 95, and 5670–1910, p. 184; also Torah Chaim and Likkutei Sichos, Volume 24, pp. 42-44. 245 Rebbe Rashub Netzachon.

128continual relativisation of different levels and spheres within Seder Histalshlus,

by claiming that Essence is not susceptible to mental or ‘physical’ subdivision.

Implicit in this would appear to be the idea that it stands outside the normal

relationship of cause and effect. Though it may be itself a cause, it stands outside of,

or perhaps one might say, at the beginning of, the chain of cause and effect. The

second law, kol Etzem bilti mispashet (no essence has extension)246 is a corollary of

the first. Essence must have a simple, uniform nature. That which has extension is by

definition capable of subdivision, if not physically, then by mental analysis. The third

law, kol Etzem bilti mishtana (no essence changes) expresses the view that essence is

immutable: it does not change over time. In Aristotelian terms, that which changes

moves from potentiality to act, and is, therefore, divisible. Since Essence is

indivisible it cannot be subject to change. Implicit here is probably the idea that

essence is eternal, that is to say, it is not subject to time. The fourth law, kol Etzem

bilti misgale (no essence reveals itself)247 is a corollary of the other three. If Essence

has these three characteristics then it must be totally transcendent: it is unknowable.

Though it may be the ultimate ground of being, it cannot in itself be known. All that

we can know are accidents; we cannot know the Essence that stands behind them.

Now we come to a typical Hasidic philosophical paradox, for there is a ‘fifth

law’ of Essence, stated in the famous dictum attributed to the Baal Shem Tov, that ‘if

you touch or grasp part of Essence you are touching all of it’248 This fifth law may

not be so much a statement about the nature of Essence, as an attempt to talk about

the Jew’s relationship to it. In one sense, it follows logically from the first three. If

Essence is indivisible, uniform, unextended and unchanging, then when one grasps

‘part’ of it, one has grasped ‘the whole’ (since, in fact, it does not have ‘parts’),

whether one knows this or not. However, the ‘fifth law’ seems to stand in clear

breach of the fourth, and indeed runs counter to the thrust of the other three. The four

246 Dafin. Demystifying the Mystical, p. 55. 247 Rebbe Rashub Netzachon. 248 Baal Shem Tov, Addenda to Keser Shem Tov, sec. 127. Shivkhe Ha-Besht, p. 329. Also see Saadia Gaon, The Book of Beliefs and Opinions , trans. Samuel Rosenblatt. New Haven: Yale University Press, (1948), and trans. Alexander Altmann in Lewy, H., Altmann, A. and Heinemann, I. Eds., Three Jewish Philosophers. New York: Atheneum, (1985). Altmann, Alexander. “Saadya's Theory of Revelation: Its Origin and Background,” in Studies in Religious Philosophy and Mysticism by Alexander Altmann. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, (1969). Blumenthal, D. “Croyance et attributs essentiels dans la théologie juive médiévale et moderne,” Revue des études juives (1994). For the Rebbe’s understanding of this idea see, Sefer HaSichos Shabbos Parshas Acharei, Shabbos HaGodol 12th Day of Nissan, 5744 and Sefer Hisvadiyos, 10

th Shvat, 5711, (1951). Likkutei Sichos,

vol. 2, p.499, and vol. 20, Adar II-Iyar, 5744.

129laws postulate that Essence is utterly transcendent, and if this means anything,

then it means that it cannot stand in any relationship whatsoever to the human

intellect. The Baal Shem’s statement, however, clearly asserts that Essence is

accessible, and indeed entirely graspable, and this assertion has considerable

religious importance. The contradiction may be softened by arguing that this

knowing is not a knowing of the intellect, but some other sort of mystical knowing.

The verbs which the Baal Shem uses, ‘touch’ and ‘grasp’, may be carefully chosen

precisely to avoid the idea of intellectual knowing. But this still brings Essence into

relationship with humanity, and contradicts the claim that it ‘does not reveal itself’.

There are other statements defining Essence scattered throughout Hasidic

writings, which, though not necessarily formulated in as precise and dogmatic a

fashion as the above ‘laws’, are, on the whole, compatible with them, and useful for

elucidating how they have been understood. It is worth collecting and commenting

on these, in order to fill out the Hasidic concept of Essence. 249

1. Essence is simple: It has no parts or subsections; its nature is uniform and

non-composite. It can be seen on one level as analogous to the lowest common

denominator.

2. Essence can be so concealed that it is unaware of itself. The idea here

appears to be that there can be no duality within Essence. It is something in and of

itself; it does not need to reveal itself, not even to itself. To illustrate this idea the

analogy is quoted of an individual who never meets or interacts with anyone else and

who thus needs no name, since a name is understood to be required only in relation

to others. Essence has no relation to any other of any kind. It has no need to disclose

itself and hence no need of a name. It is even unaware of itself. This level or aspect

can be found within Seder Hishtalshlus, and is called Radla (Resha d'lo ityada, ‘the

Unknowable Head’). Rabbi Yitzchak Ginsburg explains that ‘in the Zohar, the full

phrase for “the Unknowable Head” is “the Head which neither knows nor is known.”

This implies that this level of Keter is neither conscious of its own inner being, nor is

known to any consciousness outside of itself’250, since within Keter, the supernal

249 Schneerson. Menachem Mendel On the Essence of Chassidus. New York: Kehot Publications Society (1986) pp. 72-79. 250 http://www.inner.org/worlds/reshadlo.htm. (23/10/03).

130crown of the highest level of Godhead, which is usually synonymous with

Ratzon, is found Taanug, within which is found the Etzem of the soul or God.

3. The experience of Essence results in no feeling; it is thus a non-experience:

The Rebbe Rashab explains that from the perspective of Man, the highest level of

achievement in the experience of the divine is that of non-feeling, in effect a lack of

experience (hergesh).

4. Pleasure is the closest one can get to an experience of Essence: Pleasure

here means Taanug, pleasure on the level of soul. The Essence of the soul is

indefinable and inexperienceable: it simply is. The feeling that is most closely akin to

Essence is pleasure in just being, without any reason.

5. Essence is able to bridge the gap between two opposites: Essence is not

limited to being either spiritual or physical. It belongs to a different dimension that

transcends both these categories. Neither ‘spiritual’ nor ‘physical’ adequately

describe its nature, because it is the ultimate transcendent aspect of the thing. It is

qualitatively different from any physical or spiritual aspects of that of which it is the

Essence.

6. Essence is found in all places in equal measure: The nature of Essence is

such that, because it is so absolutely transcendent and has no relationship to matter,

time or space, such dimensions do not stop it from being ‘there’. This is related to the

principle kol Etzem bilti mishtana (no essence changes). Because Essence is that

aspect of a thing which does not change when the thing is in relation, since Essence

in itself cannot be in relation to anything, Essence is, paradoxically, as much within

space, time and matter as it is beyond them.

7. Essence has no reason for being other than itself: Essence is ultimately

independent. It has no prior cause or effect. It is unchanging, and it exists, (although

perhaps not in a way that we can understand) without standing in relationship to

anything.

8. Essence is ultimately transcendent, yet immanent: As mentioned above

under point six, the nature of Essence is so ultimately transcendent, beyond all

131categories and classifications of existence and non-existence, that paradoxically it

exists in equal measure in all places and at all times. Because of this, it has been

compared to oil, which is able to rise above other liquids and yet to soak into almost

all porous objects. 251 Thus Essence at once transcends and is immanent in the object

of which it is the essence.

The definition of Atzmus

All these principles apply generally to Etzem. However, when used to define Atzmus,

the Essence of God, they gain added meaning and significance.

The term Etzem and Atzmus in Chasidus and Dirah Betachtonim appear associated with the set of ideas generally denoted by the term Etzem (Atzmus denoting that part of the Godhead which has the nature of Etzem).252

In contrast to the word Etzem which seems to be used primarily as a common noun,

the word Atzmus is predominately understood as a proper noun. It is, in effect, a

name for the one God. Atzmus, as distinct from Etzem, does not point to a hidden

Essence in contrast to revealed accidents. Rather it stresses the actual existence of the

Essence. Atzmus is ‘the Essence itself’, and not ‘the Essence of’. As a theological

term, in contrast to the multitude of Kabbalistic terms or biblical names which

symbolically express attributes of God, Atzmus expresses nothing about the divine,

but denotes or is the divine in and of itself. It seems to correspond broadly to the

Zoharic concept of Ein Sof. The actual usage of the term, however, is extremely

problematic. There are examples where Atzmus is not used to describe God Himself,

but rather an Essence. In such cases, I would argue, it is chosen to highlight the

actual being of the Essence, as a concrete reality, or the existence of the Essence as it

exists for itself and not in relation to anything other than itself.

Examples where the term is used to describe the Essence of God (the normal

meaning of Atzmus) are understood in two ways. Firstly Atzmus is used as a common

noun, and this, I would suggest, is what we find in the second section of Tanya;

Shaar Yichud VeEmuna, where the Alter Rebbe talks of the Essence of God. And,

secondly it is used as a proper noun, in effect as a name for God. In Ranut, one of the

251 Schneerson. Menachem Mendel On the Essence of Chassidus. New York: Kehot Publications Society (1986) pp. 30-33. 252 Levin, Heaven on Earth. p.147

132seminal writings of the Rebbe Rashab, and also predominately in the Rebbe’s

own works, Atzmus is understood to be the essential-actual God-Being as it exists

independently, rather than the Essence of God, that is concealed, so to speak, within

the ‘phenomenon’ of God. These two meanings of the term Atzmus, viz., Essence

Itself and Essence of, could be seen as reflecting two particular world views known

in Hasidism as Yechudi Ailo and Yechudi Tata, or Daas Elyon and Daas Tachton,

that is, the higher, supernal standpoint and the lower, terrestrial standpoint. The

former is, so to speak, from God’s omnipresent, objective perspective, and the latter

from Man’s finite, subjective perspective.

Atzmus from God’s perspective, is singular in nature, and simply is, without

the dualism implied in being in relation to. As Levin explains: ‘Atzmus denotes God

as He is in Himself, not as He is when in relation to other entities … God in Himself

not God in relation’.253 Therefore Atzmus does not lend itself to revelation, since that

would bring it by definition into relation, and introduce a duality between the

revealer and the recipient of the revelation, and between the state of concealment and

the state of disclosure. Atzmus, from Man’s perspective, denotes ‘the Essence of’,

and inevitably implies a duality between the ‘essence’ or ‘core’ of the entity and that

which is unessential or accidental. This dualism, which emerges when Atzmus is

viewed from the human standpoint, and which sets Atzmus over against a world of

‘otherness’, demonstrates the limiting and distorting effect of the human perspective,

from which it is difficult to grasp the truly singular nature of Atzmus, and to see it as

‘Essence in Itself’.

Atzmus is also used to express God’s ‘ultimate transcendence,’ or ‘radical

otherness’. However, this usage, while acknowledging the fundamental difficulty

Man faces in relating to, and understanding the nature of, Atzmus, still creates the

sort of dualism mentioned above. Even though Atzmus is relegated to the furthest

reaches of the transcendent realm, it still stands in relationship to Man. This is

presumably why the Rebbe states that it is beyond all cognition and definition, and

cannot be talked of even in terms of ‘transcendence’:

253 Levin, Heaven On Earth. p. 147.

133… the blessed Mahusso and Atzmusso … it is impossible to say about it that it is the aspect of transcendence, or even the aspect of distant transcendence and other such terms. Because the blessed Mahusso and Atzmusso isn't within the boundaries of ideas at all …’254

The Revelation of Atzmus (Gilluy Atzmus)

Atzmus, then, designates the unknowable God, who stands beyond the reach of

human cognition and description, and even beyond concealment and revelation. Yet

— and here we come to another typical Chabad theological paradox — we find

references to the ‘revelation’ (gilluy) or ‘drawing down’ (hamshacha) of Atzmus in

the writings of Chabad, 255 including those of the Rebbe. How can this make any

sense? If Etzem, let alone Atzmus, by definition does not disclose itself, how can one

talk of the ‘revelation’ or ‘drawing down’ of Atzmus? How can there be degrees of

its manifestation? How can Atzmus, be understood as a proper noun, undergo the

change implied in the act of revelation? How can it appear at one place rather than

another, when its presence is constant and uniform? How can it enter into relation,

and become known? The solution offered to this conundrum is to argue that we can

talk only of revelation with regards to Man and human perception. It is only from the

human perspective that degrees of disclosure make any sense, or that the concepts of

hamshacha and gilluy can be used.256 These make no sense from the side of God.

There is no movement within God towards revelation; Atzmus is already ‘there’,

equally in all places and at all times. The revelation of Atzmus occurs only in the

mind of Man, as the veil is to a greater or lesser degree lifted, so that Man grasps

what is already there. It is the varying degrees of Man’s awareness of God, to which

the ‘revelation’ terminology refers, not to an ‘objective’ movement within the being

of God, or a fundamental change in his relationship to the world. As Rabbi Yitzchak

Ginsberg, a renowned Chabad Kabbalist, explains (my emphasis):

Of G-d's Absolute Essence it is said: ‘no thought can grasp You at all …’ Even when we refer to this and other related phenomena with regard to G-d as His being ‘the Paradox of paradoxes,’ this phrase itself is not meant to define G-d but only to describe the nature of man's experience of Him.

254 Sefer Maamorim Melukat, 2, p. 37, 11th of Nissan, 5747/1987 (original 5742/1982). 255 Sefer Maamorim, 5661, by the Rebbe Rashab, p. 178. 256 Sefer Maamorim, 5672, by the Rebbe Rashab, p.129; see also Likkutei Sichos, Volume 17, p. 328, and Volume 23, p. 219.

134A profound implication of the doctrine of Atzmus appears to be that its

‘revelation’ annihilates the distinction and the hierarchy that traditional theology

postulates as existing between matter and spirit. The dualism of matter and spirit, and

the privileging of the latter over the former, is almost as deeply embedded in

traditional Jewish theology as it is in Christian. At its most extreme this dualism

defines matter as intrinsically evil and spirit as intrinsically good. If, however,

Atzmus exists in equal measure in all places and at all times, and if it is beyond all

categories of human thought,257 if ‘for the Blessed Atzmus Mahus it is not possible to

compare or to make distinctions and differences between higher and lower,’258 then it

follows that the revelation of Atzmus implies the transcending, indeed, the negation

of the dualism between spirit and matter, between good and evil. Atzmus is ultimate

reality, but ultimate reality is beyond these distinctions. The implications of this are

profound, and potentially ‘heretical’. The reason why such theologies engender

remarkably little theological opposition and debate within traditional Judaism is not

just because they are expressed in highly obscure, technical language, and Judaism is

much less interested in dogma than is Christianity, but also because the realization of

these theologies is put off till the messianic age. This gap between the theory and its

implementation allows room for potentially antinomian and heretical theologies to be

expounded, provided their implementation is firmly and safely relegated to a distant

future.

Leviathan (Spirit) versus Behemoth (Matter)

A reinterpretation of the famous Midrashic tale of the great eschatological battle

between the two great mythical monsters Leviathan and Behemoth259 is used to

express the idea that the dualism between spirit and matter will finally be overcome

in the messianic age. The fourth Lubavitcher Rebbe, the Tzemach Tzedek, explains in

his Encyclopaedia of Hasidic Philosophy, that Leviathan represents spirit and

Behemoth represents matter.260 Leviathan represents spirit because, being a fish, it is

constantly in contact with the source of its life, that is to say, the water in which it

lives. Water, as the source of life, has enormous symbolic significance in Jewish

257 Rule Number 6 and Number 8. 258 Sefer Maamarim Melukat, 1, p. 250-255. 259 Vayikra Rabbah 13.3. 260 An Encyclopedia of Hassidic Philosophy; Sefer HaLikutim - Da"ch Tzemach Tzedek (Kehot: New York, 1984), p. 646.

135tradition, and both God and the Torah are frequently referred to metaphorically as

water. Water comes from God, descending from heaven to earth. There is a tradition

that the righteous will be reincarnated as fish. Since the fish never closes its eyes, it

is compared to God, who ‘never slumbers nor sleeps’ as he watches over the world.

Leviathan as a being constantly in touch with the source of its life (water) fittingly

represents the spiritual world which is directly in touch with God. Moreover,

Leviathan, since it is, according to tradition, as large as the ocean itself, it can serve

to represent the spiritual world, olam d’escasia (the hidden worlds), which is often

compared to the ocean. Behemoth, on the other hand, gets its life from the grass on

which it stands, and is separate from that which sustains it, and so fittingly represents

the material world, which is distant from God. Nevertheless Behemoth has great

strength, which, if used properly, can be harnessed for good.

In the Midrashic story the ‘Great Battle’ between Leviathan and Behemoth

takes place at the ‘End of Days’ — that is to say, now, in the Rebbe’s view, since he

believed that we are already at the End of Days. Behemoth and Leviathan ‘will do

battle with each other as a sport for the righteous in the time to come. The Behemoth

will attack the Leviathan with its horns and gore it, and the Leviathan will attack the

Behemoth with its fins and rend it,261 and will pull the Behemoth down and slice

through its neck’.262 The two mythical beasts will fight each other to their deaths, and

the flesh of both will be eaten, together with a special wine263 that is said to have

been hidden away by God during the six days of creation, to be served up to the

righteous at the messianic banquet in the world to come. The battle of Leviathan and

Behemoth, and their ultimate deaths signify the annihilation of spirit and matter as

distinct entities, and the final revelation of that which transcends them both, Atzmus.

The revelation of the transcendence of Atzmus negates the dichotomy between the

spiritual and the physical, and unites the two in an indissoluble unity.264

The same idea is expressed through a meditation on the two basic names of

God in the Bible, namely YHVH and Elohim, which represent respectively the

261 Leviathan is female and the Behemoth is male according to Talmud Bava Basra 75b. 262 Vayikra Rabbah 13.3 263 Talmud Berachos 34b. 264 See, the appendix in Atzmuss and the Status of the Torah in the Messianic Era, by Max Ariel Kohanzad (MA dissertation, University of Manchester, 2000). This is also available at http://www.xlubi.com (10/09/03).

136concepts of unity and multiplicity, of Sovev (Transcendence) and Memale

(Immanence), of the spiritual and the physical. In the messianic era, these two names

will be united, thus revealing the aspect of God that transcends them both, Atzmus.

Ultimately there will be no up nor down, no good nor bad, no matter nor spirit, but

only the final revelation, and the unmediated, universal consciousness of the divine

nature of existence. Neither the physical nor the spiritual constitutes ultimate reality.

Both will be swallowed up by the manifestation of Atzmus, or ‘Essential Existence’,

that transcends them both. ‘In order that there should be the union of transcendence

and immanence there has to be the drawing out of Atzmus, the Or Ein Sof, which

transcends transcendence and immanence.’265 And so the Messiah and the messianic

era will share in this transcendent-immanent divinity, in the realization of the

impossibility of impossibilities, the fusion of absolute opposites. Leviathan and

Behemoth will be dead, but their remains will still exist, and even provide joy and

sustenance for the righteous. The spiritual will not exist as distinct from the physical,

nor the physical from the spiritual, but rather the spiritual will be physical and the

physical spiritual, and this unity will not be just a temporary revelation (as was the

revelation at Mt Sinai), but a permanent reality.

The battle between the physical and spiritual will be well and truly over.

Matter and spirit will no longer be irreconcilable opposites, but will be joined

together and become one. The stuff of the world will not be either one or the other,

but the physical will become spiritual and the spiritual will be manifest in the

physical. God will not, strictly speaking, be found in the phenomena per se, but

rather in their being. Nevertheless being manifests itself in phenomena, which means

that all the phenomena of the world that exist share their existence with Atzmus. In

this vision of the future, it is hard to see how the theistic ontological distinction

between God and the world can any longer apply. Both God and the World will be

one: there will be no divisions; the world that is experienced will become divine,

without hierarchies, or inner-outer dichotomies. Atzmus is a highly paradoxical and

problematic theological concept, which leaves the physical and spiritual worlds at the

end of time as the hollow corpses of once mighty battling beasts. This theology not

only evacuates the highest of the spiritual realms of their divine glory but also alters

fundamentally the lowest material realms, so that they are no longer purely physical,

265 Kuntres, 14th Shevat, 5750/1990; Sefer Maamarim Melukat, 1.

137but become spiritual. And this transformation is apparently meant to happen not

only in a conceptual or symbolic way, but also really and actually.

The slaughter of Leviathan and Behemoth represents the union of heaven and

earth at the end of history. This union was anticipated at the giving of the Torah on

Mount Sinai, when it is said in the book of Exodus that God descended from heaven

upon the mountain,266 and Moses ascended, so the Midrash has it, from the mountain

to heaven.267 This is taken as a figure of the descent of the Transcendent and the

ascent of the Immanent, which marks the revelation of Atzmus. However, the

revelation of Atzmus on Mount Sinai was incomplete and temporary. Therefore, the

distinction between higher and lower, physical and spiritual, God and World, did not

fall away then completely. The union was only temporary and the distinction

between physical and spiritual returned. This union will only manifest itself fully and

return permanently in the messianic era.

Matter as the primary locus of Gilluy Atzmus

The exposition I have given so far reflects a view of the relationship between the

physical and the spiritual that is found in the earlier, more traditional Chabad

sources. This, as I have argued, regards spirit and matter in the great scheme of

things as being ultimately equal, since both alike will ultimately be transcended and

overwhelmed in the revelation of Atzmus. The Rebbe broadly accepted this view, and

it can be found expressed in a variety of ways throughout his writings. But now we

come to a surprising and highly subversive move specifically within the Rebbe’s

thinking, which seems to stress again one of these polarities over the other, and even

more surprisingly the one that is stressed is the physical, not the spiritual. Why does

the Rebbe reintroduce this difference and stress the physical over the spiritual?

There is a strong urge within the Lubavitch movement to negate any desire

for revelations of God, whether they be mystical visions or meditations, and move

towards a realization of the Baal Shem Tov’s ‘law of Essence’, that ‘if you touch or

grasp part of the Essence, you are touching all of it’268, which is taken as an attempt

266 Exodus 19:20. 267 Exodus 24:1. 268 Baal Shem Tov, Addenda to Keser Shem Tov, sec. 127.

138to grasp hold of God himself. The reported words of the Chabad-Lubavitch

movement’s first leader, the Alter Rebbe (Rabbi Schneur Zalman), on his death bed

are seen as pointing in this direction: ‘I don’t want Your Gan Eden, I don’t want

Your Olam HaBa … All I want is You!’ What this is taken as meaning is that, that

the form in which, according to the tradition, God will be finally experienced by the

righteous — miracles, angels, Gan Eden, all the paraphernalia of Olam haBa — does

not in fact reveal God’s Essence, the ‘Real God’ so to speak, and that even Heaven

and the World to Come will have to be sacrificed, if one is to grasp Atzmus, and

touch the face of the unknowable God. In other words, holiness, spirituality, thought,

ethics are not revelations of the Essence of God, but of his ‘external’ manifestations,

his attributes: ‘Thus in this system the mystic must in fact strive not to be lured and

ensnared by the romance of the abstract, by the shimmer of the transcendent …

They are merely attributes of God, merely manifestations … The mystic hereby

experiences, rather than is God.’ 269

This privileging of matter in the thought of the Rebbe is deeply perplexing,

since it appears to run counter to the whole thrust of the argument that there can be

no difference or hierarchy between matter and spirit in the light of Atzmus. It is not

easy to tell whether this new hierarchy is ‘real’ or only ‘perceived’. In the latter case

it might be seen as necessary to stress the divinity of matter over spirit in order to

correct Man’s impressions, because he is so used to hold matter in low esteem. In

other words, for people to strike the right balance in the end, matter has to be given

priority now. This may be part of the explanation, but there are also hints in the

Rebbe’s thinking that he believed that the primacy of matter was ‘real’.270 There are

a number of possible ways of understanding this. The transformation of matter and

spirit in the revelation of Atzmus is not a symmetrical process. It inevitably creates a

new hierarchy in which matter is on top. The result is an upside-down world271 in

which that which is normally considered to be ‘high’ becomes ‘low’, and, more

importantly’, ‘the low, in and of its lowliness — because it is low — is high.’272

269 Levin, Heaven on Earth, p. 72. 270 One is reminded of the suspicion entertained by many readers of Spinoza that he was at heart a materialist. 271 This reversal of values is linked to a famous story in the Talmud (Bava Basra 10a) which tells of how Rav Yosef the son of Rav Yehoshua, having been dead for a short period of time, was resuscitated. To his father’s question as to what he saw while dead, he responded, ‘I saw an olam hafuch (an upside- down world). The elyonim (high) were low and the tachtonim (low) were high.’ ‘You saw an olam barur (a clear world)!’ his father replied. 272 Levin, Heaven on Earth, p. 77.

139There are also ideas within Lurianic Kabbalah that are invoked to support this

conclusion. In the Lurianic cosmic drama of the Breaking of the Vessels (Shviras

HaKelim), it is held that shards of the highest godly lights have become trapped in

the material world, or even that the Breaking of the Vessels itself resulted in the

creation of the material world. The idea that the godly lights are embedded in the

lower material spheres is borrowed and amplified in the Rebbe’s this-worldly

theology. The higher the supernal light the deeper its fall into the physical world.

The image usually employed to illustrate this idea is of a stone wall that falls

down sideways. The higher the position of the stone in the wall the further away it

will end up from the base of the wall, whereas stones placed lower in the wall only

fall a short distance from the wall. This image is an attempt to convey the

paradoxical idea that the further something is away from godliness in this world, the

higher its source in the Godhead. Physicality is from a higher source than spirituality,

the body is higher than the soul, and perhaps even the non-Jew than the Jew. It is this

new hierarchy that the Rebbe believes will become manifest in the future, and is, in

some sense, already present now. This idea in its most extreme form postulates that

the highest divine reality, God’s very Essence, is found chiefly in that which is

normally considered furthest from His presence and most antithetical to His Being.

The world, which is understood traditionally as that which is not-God, becomes not

only the hiding place of God’s Essence, but the place where God’s Essence is

primarily expressed. This radical view, that Atzmus is found more in the material

than the spiritual realm, runs, as I stated earlier, counter to the trend of normative

Hasidic theology. The Rebbe sees it as illustrated in the fact that the meal of

Leviathan and Behemoth will be a physical meal, consisting of fish, meat and

wine.273

This surprising idea that Atzmus is most closely associated with physical

existence needs to be explored a little further. Firstly, we need to assume that

physical existence is in no way alien to Atzmus since Atzmus is in all places equally,

including the physical world. Secondly and more importantly we need to assume that

the physical world itself represents a revelation of God’s paradoxical ability to create

273 Rav Saadiah Gaon, as quoted in Shvilei Emunah 10:2; Rashba on Bava Batra 74b; Ramban on Bereishis 1:21; Kad HaKemach, end of sec. 8; Raavan in Sefer Maamar HaSeichel; Ibn Ezra on Daniel 12:2; Raavad on Hilchos Teshuvah 8:4; Avodas HaKodesh 2:41; Maharsha on Bava Basra 74b; Likkutei Torah, Parshas Tzav.

140an existence that is independent of His existence and in apparent contradiction to

it. Thus the world represents the supreme revelation of God’s infinite and

paradoxical power, to create an entity that negates His existence, and yet for God be

to there fully. This is called the impossibility of impossibilities, the paradox of

paradoxes (Nimnu haNimnos), or Gilluy Helem HaAtzmi, the revelation that the

Essence remains essentially concealed.'

Even if gilluy Atzmus is limited to an event purely within the mind of Man, it

still involves a qualitatively different kind of revelation from the traditional idea of

intellectual enlightenment. The reason for this is that the nature of Atzmus, from

Man’s perspective, is beyond any disclosure, and hence remains in a state of

concealment, or helem. Therefore a ‘revelation of Atzmus’, must imply something

very different from any other type of revelation: it is a Gilluy Helem HaAtzmi, that is

to say, a revelation that the Essence remains concealed, or a dawning awareness that

the unknowable remains in a state of being unknown. Even within the lower levels of

the Godhead, which are technically already ‘after’ and ‘within’ the primordial

‘space’ or ‘womb’ within God called the Tzim Tzum, a similar process occurs. This is

the case with Radla, a ‘level of keter [which] is neither conscious of its own inner

being nor is known to any consciousness outside of itself’.274

There are a number of traditional Hasidic similies which are used to explain

the nature of this helem (hiddenness). It is compared to the potential ‘water that

exists within fire’ and the potential ‘fire that exists within water’. Both of these

comparisons attempt to express a type of concealment that captures the nature of the

essential concealment of an essence. This is different from other kinds of

actualisation of concealed potentialities, such as the fire hidden within a glowing

coal, or the fire within an ordinary, unlit, piece of coal, or the spark that lies in

potentia within a flintstone. Such examples275 represent the nature of concealment in

general, but do not reflect adequately the nature of the Helem HaAtzmi. It is true that

the simile of the flintstone is sometimes used to illustrate the concept of Gilluy helem

haAtzmi, but a moment’s reflection will convince us that it is hardly appropriate for

this purpose. The stone needs only to be struck for the spark hidden within it to be

revealed. However, it is virtually impossible for there to be a revelation of the water

274 http://www.inner.org/worlds/reshadlo.htm (19/10/03). 275 Sefer HaMaamorim, 5, p. 287.

141concealed within fire, or the fire concealed within water, although according to

Hasidic thought both these exist in potentia within their opposites.276 Such

‘revelations’ are beyond natural laws. They can be disclosed only by miracle (a

violation of the laws of nature), or by theorizing, which might be able to demonstrate

that they are, at an intellectual level theoretical if not actual possibilities. A case of

such theorizing might be the demonstration that a deduction from Einstein’s General

Theory of Relativity (that everything is a form of energy) is that water can become

fire and fire water.277

Atzmus278 does not refer to anything other than itself, and is not actually a

source of anything, either spiritual or physical, since the notion of source has

connotations of dualism. However, if by definition it does not reveal itself, nor is it a

revelation of anything, what can the content be of a revelation of Atzmus? The

answer must be that it can only be the revelation of its essential concealment, the

revelation that it remains beyond revelation. Revelation in any conventional sense

would not be involved: the ‘revelation’ of Atzmus is a revelation of nothing. This is

not a mystical No-Thing279, i.e., that God has no connection to anything, whether

ideas or substances, nor is it the aspect of Nothingness as opposed to Being, nor even

the Kabbalistic ‘Void’ that precedes creation. It is rather an awareness (and thus, in a

sense, a revelation) that the unknowable in its disclosure remains unknown and

undisclosed. A corollary of this is that since there is ‘no openly revealed Divinity,’

reality, or things as they are, paradoxically become the greatest revelation of God,

that the mundane world itself becomes the substance of the essential divinity,

Atzmus.

276 The idea of ‘water in the midst of fire’ and ‘fire in the midst of water’ goes back to Jewish sources in late antiquity. For example in Sefer Heikhalos (better known as The Third Book of Enoch), among the mysteries of creation which Metatron shows to Rabbi Ishmael ‘fire in the midst of water’and ‘water in the midst of fire’ are included. The idea is as old as the First Book of Enoch, which describes God’s celestial palace as manifesting such apparent contradictions of the laws of physics. 277 Or in the form of a miracle, for example in Egypt with the ten plagues where one of them according to the Midrash, was hail that was on fire. Such a miracle reveals that which was essentially concealed and the fusion of polar opposites, which is a classical characteristic of the manifestation of Atzmus. 278 The next few sections summarize a paper which I read in December 2001 to the Departmental Seminar of the Department of Religions and Theology, University of Manchester, titled ‘Atzmus: and the Theology of Lubavitch Messianism,’(available at http://www.xlubi.com). See also my dissertation submitted to University of Salford in June 2003, titled God: a Four Letter Word. 279 Matt, Daniel "The Concept of Nothingness in Jewish Mysticism", in The Problem of Pure Consciousness: Mysticism and Philosophy, edited by Robert K. C. Forman. New York: Oxford University Press, 1990.

142Again a vivid and simple simile is at hand to attempt to clarify this

complex idea. The Rebbe explains that the phase of an eclipse of the moon that runs

from full moon to the moon’s disappearance at totality is a greater revelation of

God’s Essence, than the phase where it moves from totality back to fullness. He is, of

course, playing here with the traditional idea that light is a metaphor for divine

revelation. The full moon represents the highest revelation of God’s affection

towards the Jewish people, and symbolically anticipates the fulfilment of the

messianic prophecy that ‘in the future the light of the moon will be like that of the

sun.’280 The Rebbe turns this traditional image on its head, explaining that the phase

of the eclipse from fullness to totality, that is, when it is becoming darker, is, in fact,

the greater revelation of Atzmus, and the darker it gets the greater the degree of

revelation, till at totality the maximum degree is attained. This symbolizes the

revelation of God which is beyond ‘revelation,’ and expresses the paradox that the

revelation of Atzmus is a non-revelation. The implication clearly is that the darkness

is only an apparent darkness. It is, in fact, a manifestation of an even greater light.

When the individual grasps this, and internalizes it, then a ‘revelation’ of Atzmus

occurs. (To what extent this involves a fatalistic acceptance of the darkness of the

world as the ultimate revelation of God is a question which we cannot pursue here.)

The Rebbe explains the inverse relationship between the decrease of light and the

revelation of God’s Essence or Atzmus, as follows:

The decreasing light of the moon, is only a reduction on the level of [perceived] ‘light’ (which is merely a reflection of the Sun). [This reduction in light is] because of [an increasing] … proximity to the Essence (Etzem) which transcends the source of light; however, it is, consequently, not a reduction in revelation, since … there continues additionally … the revelation of the Essence [which is beyond light!].281

That which covers and conceals manifestations of divinity, are the preferred vehicle

for expressing that which cannot be expressed or made manifest, namely the

unknowable and hidden Essence God, Atzmus.

280 The moon is used to symbolize Israel in Breishis Rabba 6:3, and Shemos Rabbah 50:5 and the restoring of her light to the equal of the sun’s light is a symbol of her eschatological triumph. Also see, Isaiah. 30:26. 281 Sefer HaSichos, 5752, p. 160.

143Finitude and Infinity

This paradox is also explored through a discussion of the concept of infinity. In

traditional theology God is ‘infinite’; in fact he is the ultimate Infinite Being. But

what does this mean? There is, arguably, a fundamental contradiction at the heart of

traditional ideas of God’s infinity, namely that the state of infinity is apparently, by

definition, a state of limitation. If the infinite is by definition limited to being infinite,

then such a definition arguably does not adequately encompass the true nature of

infinity. A new understanding of infinity must be found, able to express the concept

of an infinity that does not have any limitations. This alternative concept of infinity

would have to allow for the possibility that, if the infinite is to be truly infinite, then

it must also be capable of being completely finite. This would reject the notion that it

is fundamentally contrary to the nature of the infinite for it to be finite. Rather, this

ability to be finite would be seen precisely as the ultimate proof of its infinity. This

rather tortuous logic seems to me to lie at the heart the Rebbe’s doctrine of Atzmus. It

opens the way to seeing the material substance of the world, the ultimate expression

of finitude, as the ultimate expression of the infinity of God. And this can have very

practical religious implications, which are well seen by Faitel Levin: as a

consequence of this doctrine: ‘Mundane physical worship reaches deeper into the

substance of reality and deeper into the Godhead, as it were, than does spiritual

worship.’282 Although God, and particularly Atzmus, are absolutely infinite and

beyond limitation, in virtue of this very quality they can also be limited and by

implication material. God can create a stone that even He cannot pick up.

This argument can, perhaps, be summed up formulaically as follows:

Traditional equation:

Infinity = Infinite

Finitude = Finite

New equation: part one:

Infinity (if it is not able to be Finite) is limited

and consequently not absolutely Infinite.

282 Levin, Heaven on Earth, p. 8.

144Therefore (traditional) Infinity = (traditional) Finitude

New equation: part two:

True Infinity is able to be Finite

{but this transforms Infinity it into a New Finitude}

New Finitude > Old Infinity (because it is Infinity expressed in Finitude)

This apparent ‘limitation’ of the Infinite, when it chooses to be finite, far from being

a real limitation is in fact the greatest expression of God’s infinitude. The world now

seems to be turned on its head: Infinity as it is traditionally understood, turns out to

be more limited than Finitude. As Levin points out:

Upon consideration it becomes clear that in fact not only have the two trends of the infinite and finite been supplanted … but even the relative meanings of the infinite and finite categories themselves have been reversed. From this perspective, that which is finite rather than infinite, self-contained rather than expansive, roots deeper in God.283

God’s Essence cannot be found in any spiritual realm or plane, or made manifest

through intellectual exercises, since the Essence of God is found in that which

apparently does not manifest His existence, namely the physical world. Again, as

Levin explains in Heaven on Earth:

An axiomatic shift redirects religious man away from God’s wisdom, love or transcendence, towards His Essence, His Being — to be found specifically in the prosaic, physical and finite.284

What Levin is implying is that the focus of homo religiosus should no longer be

God’s wisdom, His Torah, His love for Israel, and His absolute transcendence, with

its traditional implication of the unbridgeable ontological gap between the Creator

and the created. Rather the goal of homo religiosus should be to grasp God’s

essential self, His very Being, which, as Levin argues, is co-essential with the being

of the World. From this perspective God’s Essence is found not only in the heart of

each human being, and in Man’s awareness of the process of just being, but in the

283 Levin, Heaven on Earth, p. 102. 284 Levin, Heaven on Earth, p. 84.

145physical stuff of being, and even the embodied being, in the physicality of the

human body.

If the Essence of God is to be found in the physical itself, there is no point in repressing and subduing one’s bodily dictates — rather recognize them for the Godliness they are. … The ultimate mystical union occurs specifically in the physical body itself as in the very physicality of the objective world … not because the physical serves as a springboard for the spiritual — no, physicality itself, qua physicality, provides him with the ultimate mystical encounter … the more finite, amounts to less ‘tainted’ … greater purity and more of the character of essence.285

God is the hidden Essence of everything, but also the matter that is the phenomena.

Atzmus in its purest sense, having no form, cannot be revealed at all. Nonetheless,

Atzmus is found more in the physical than the spiritual, and paradoxically expresses

itself more in the physical, which by definition has form and many different forms.

All beings share the idea of Being, and yet the ultimate and absolute Being is

unknowable, since it has no form in itself, yet it discloses itself in multitude of ways,

in all manifestations of Being. Thus God’s essential being is manifest in all beings

which share Being, which means that the ultimate Essence of God chooses to be

revealed in the physical and limited. What we are left with, as human beings, is the

phenomenal, physical world, which becomes the ultimate vehicle and expression of

God’s Essence. There now appears to be a practical way to implement the Baal Shem

Tov’s ‘law of Essence’, and grasp the ungraspable God. Personal redemption,

salvation and happiness can be found in the acceptance and celebration of the most

basic of all factors in the human experience, that of simply being. That involves a

grasping of a ‘part’ of Atzmus, and hence ‘the whole’.286

This is not a traditional visionary but rather an existential type of mystical

experience. This experience of self and being is the deepest of mystical experiences.

Man and the World are ‘in other words, an entity of equal ontological status with

285 Levin, Heaven on Earth, pp. 69-70. 286 It is surely not fanciful to see here a sort of ‘incarnational theology’ dressed up in Hasidic and Kabbalistic language. Scholars have long recognised incarnational language in the Zohar (see, e.g., the famous passage in Zohar III 152a on the incarnation of the Torah). The Rebbe’s ‘incarnational theology’ is as convoluted and as full of paradox as is the Christian version.

146God’.287 It is a this-worldly, ego-centred mystical experience, the ultimate

although arguably limited and refracted experience of God’s Self.

The reason the created being/self feels himself as if he has no reason or cause which preceded him, God forbid, is because he is brought into being from Atzmus, … [because] the self/being of Atzmus has no reason or cause which preceded Him … [because] there is only Him alone. … So too in the future to come, the true and inner [reality] of all things will be revealed … [namely,] that the true source of the created self/being is the True Self [i.e., God] and that [it] has no reason or cause … and this is also true now.’288

Mystical experience is usually seen as an experience of transcendence. Such a this-

worldly mystical, existential experience might at first sight seem highly paradoxical,

but it can be explained, as Levin has argued, in terms of Man’s ego and God’s Ego.

Through this existential experience ‘man reaches the highest union with God: here

his yesh [ego] merges, realizing its co-essence, with the Ultimate and Absolute Yesh

[Ego].’289 But he also recognises that this is a novel way of conceiving of, and

relating to ego:

From a [traditional] perspective, where the inherent nothingness of this reality is paramount, any assertion or sensation of being is strongly censured. … However, this highly negative connotation of yesh is being supplanted by a positive one. … The contemporary implication is that the greatest possible religious achievement is attained … because … specifically a yesh possesses the unique relationship with the Ultimate yesh, with the Ultimate Something.290

God and Man and the World’s ‘Being’, are not distinct; they are ‘co-essential’ and

perhaps at their deepest levels can be described as indistinguishable. Atzmus denotes

the ultimate Selfhood/Ego of God. As the following quotation from the Rebbe

shows, Atzmus is the ‘I am’ of God:

The explanation of ‘God is One’ is, according to the verse ‘I am God’, that ‘I am’ is Atzmus, Or Ein Sof, [and ‘I am God’ is the union of Atzmus] with the name of God [the Tetragrammaton, so they become] inclusively ‘One’, literally.’291

287 Levin, Heaven on Earth, p. 83. 288 Sefer Maamarim Melukat, 1, p. 66; Basi L’Ganni, 5719-1959. 289 Levin, Heaven on Earth, p. 84. 290 Levin, Heaven on Earth, pp. 76-77. 291 Sefer Maamarim Melukat, 2, p. 89, 18th (Chai ) Elul 5747-1987.

147In a radical inversion of reality and value, God has sold His palatial and heavenly

castle, and invested all His wealth in the very stuff of the material, physical world.

This world is where God really is, in the very Being of Existence itself. The real

world is inextricably bound up with the ultimate mystical reality. This is already a

truth now, but it will be expressed more openly in the messianic era, when the

physical world will manifest the ultimate revelation of God. It is the natural and

mundane physical World as it is, ‘warts and all,’ that is paradoxically the most

divine. ‘This world is not an antechamber, [a place where man may prepare himself

for the palace] it is the palace itself.’292

The Rebbe’s transforming messianic doctrine

When the Rebbe in his inaugural discourse Basi L’Gani set out his messianic vision

as expressed in the idea of ‘joining “God” and “World” together’, so that Godliness

and the World are one, he was expressing his whole messianic theology in a nutshell,

a theology which he was to work out in great (and paradoxical) detail over the

following years. The Rebbe later explained that the term iqar in the expression iqar

shechinta, refers to the Essence of the Shechinah, which he explains as identical to

Atzmus. The iqar shechinta, that is to say, Atzmus, was manifest in the Garden of

Eden, but not only there. It is revealed in every act of ‘joining God and World’, and

this union will become complete and fully manifest in the messianic era, the era of

‘heaven on earth’. The Rebbe argues that this joining of God and the World, was

initiated by Abraham, fulfilled briefly at Mount Sinai, and is now available through

the study and internalisation of his messianic theology, and the transformation that

this brings about. Through this the reality of Atzmus/God/World becomes truly

apparent.

It is my argument that since 1990 the Rebbe believed that not only he had

been revealed as the Messiah, but also that the world itself had in some way begun to

undergo a radical transformation: his messianic theology had become ‘real’ from that

date. The Rebbe often said that the Redemption was already here, and that all people

needed to do was to accept that it had come.

292 Levin, Heaven on Earth, p. 125.

148And the only thing missing is that a Jew should open his eyes, and if he does so he will see that all is ready for the Redemption! There is already the Set Table [Shulchan Aruch]; there is already the Leviathan and the Behemoth and the hidden wine. The Jewish people already sit at the table ‘the table of their Father’ (Brachos 3a) (the Holy One Blessed Be He), together with our righteous Moshiach.293

And yet, as we have noted elsewhere, the Rebbe, having proclaimed this doctrine of

a fully realized eschatology, would the next moment cry bitterly for the fact that the

actual redemption had not arrived, and that the world was still in exile. As we noted,

this paradox is at least softened by arguing that although the physical, material world

has already been redeemed, the realm of human consciousness has not. The Jewish

people and the world at large have not yet recognised that Exile, and therefore also

Redemption, are now only a state of mind, and that the process of Redemption

merely requires human beings to accept it, and allow it to happen. From this

perspective the World is already perfect, and contains enough material goods for

Man to live in it in a perpetual utopia. The main problem is that Man believes either

that the World is intrinsically and ineluctably evil, or that it is not perfect, but needs

fixing in some way. The solution is to convince people to believe that the world is

perfect, and so to acknowledge that ‘the redemption has arrived’. The more

individuals who do so, the more this Redemption becomes a reality. And, as we saw

before, the instrument for effecting this radical transformation are the teachings of

the Messiah, in effect the teachings of the Rebbe himself, especially his teaching

about Atzmus. Personal redemption is achieved through understanding and

internalising this new idea of the nature of God and reality, and ultimately of the

nature of self. If humanity does not redeem its consciousness, the World will

continue to behave as if it is not, in truth, redeemed. Thus the Rebbe’s last main

directive was to encourage the learning, publicizing and teaching of his own

messianic theology, as a necessary step towards the final Redemption.

There is a final, paradoxical twist to the argument, and it is that the Rebbe

speaks as if the transformation brought about in Man’s perception of the World,

through the internalizing of the his messianic theology, does not take place only on

the perceptual level. It actually objectively changes the World. Behind this may lie

the idea, found in the Midrash and in classic Kabbalah, that Creation is not a past,

293 Besuras HaGeulo, p. 156 and Sefer haSichos, 1992, vol. 1, p. 152.

149totally completed event, but an ongoing process in which Man collaborates, or

fails to collaborate, with God to complete. At any point in this process Creation is

perfect: it is as it is meant to be then, but there is still potential to be realized before

the process is complete. As a result of the Rebbe’s theological paradigm shift, the

fabric of the material world is not only changed conceptually, but also, as in quantum

physics, the nature of the physical changes in response to this conceptual

revaluation.294 It is Man’s re-conception of the world and of the nature of reality that

brings about a transformation in the actual nature of reality.

If we hold that the Divine Presence has indeed descended to earth, and that

the divine Essence is manifest in the physicality of the world, it follows that the

nature of the physical world is different from what we have hitherto perceived it to

be. The simple Essence of God, as it is manifest in physicality, has the reflective

quality of the ‘infinite simplicity that has no form’.295 It merely reflects the

projections of Man on to it. Matter reflects back and transforms itself according to

the beliefs of those viewing it. It behaves magically and miraculously. Miracles are

more ‘natural’ than we thought them to be. Materiality now has a divine and almost

magical quality: it mirrors the conception of it that the viewer has, materiality is

miraculous. Thus the world is changed and physicality transformed. It takes on the

broad characteristics of the Essence of God, of Atzmus.

Concluding reflections

It will be obvious to anyone who has tried to follow my exposition of the Rebbe’s

messianic theology that it is not easy to present it in academic terms. It is full of

paradoxes and seeming contradictions that will inevitably annoy the academic reader.

It uses at times philosophical language, but it will certainly infuriate the philosopher.

It is hard to place it on the map of Western philosophy or philosophical theology. As

I noted earlier, it is hard to translate even the key terms Etzem/Atzmus, which seem

sometimes to correspond to the Western philosophical concept of ‘essence’ and at

others to the concept of ‘substance’. The standard rendering ‘essence’ can be

294 Ravitzky, Aviezer, ‘The Lubavitch Hasidic Movement: Between Conservatism and Messianism,’ in Messianism, Zionism, and Jewish Religious Radicalism. Translated by Michael Swirsky and Jonathan Chapman. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Chicago Studies in the History of Judaism. (1996), p. 187. Wolf, Fred Alan ‘The Quantum Physics of Consciousness: Towards a New Psychology.’ Integrative Psychiatry, Vol. 3, No. 4, December 1985: p. 236. 295 Sefer HaMaamorim Melukat, v. 2, Shavuot.

150misleading. As one struggles with the Rebbe’s thought, one occasionally feels on

reasonably familiar ground, as with the ‘laws of essence’, which would be readily

understandable from the perspective of Western philosophical discussions of

substance. But then the argument spins off into paradoxes and seeming

contradictions, which leave one bemused.

It is hard to find parallels in the Western philosophical tradition to the

Rebbe’s thinking.296 The Rebbe certainly appears to be, philosophically speaking, at

least, a teleological monist, and that is arguably problematic from the standpoint of

traditional Jewish theism.297 We must remember and consider that the Rebbe in

working out his theology did not necessarily have the successors of Plato or Aristotle

in mind, much less the heirs of Logical Positivism. He was first and foremost

fulfilling his calling as the spiritual leader of a deeply religious community, and

within that context his words unquestionably had immense power and resonance. His

difficult theology, his paradoxes and contradictions, seem to have given his followers

glimpses of the mysterium tremendum et fascinans, and raised them to extraordinary

heights of religious ecstasy, devotion and service.

It is possible to distil out of his convoluted sermons and arguments some

reasonably clear (if philosophically problematic) propositions:

(1) The ultimate reality is Being in itself (Atzmus), which transcends all the

dualisms of the world of everyday perception — matter/spirit, good/evil, up/down,

before/after, even God/World.

(2) The telos of the world is the manifestation of Being in itself, which will

overwhelm and swallow up these dualisms in a new unity.

(3) Since Being in itself already exists, this revelation takes place primarily at the

level of human perception. Redemption will be achieved when all mankind perceives

the nature of Being in itself. That final redemption begins here and now, as soon as

the individual grasps the nature of Being in itself.

(4) The revelation of Being in itself is bound up with the Rebbe’s teaching, which

if accepted, will transform Man’s perception of the world, and lead him to grasp

296 There appear to be some similarities to Spinoza’s metaphysics: Atzmus at times reminds one strongly of Spinoza’s concept of deus sive natura. This parallel, if genuine, would be deeply ironic, given the expulsion of Spinoza as a heretic from the Jewish community of Amsterdam. 297 The revelation of Atzmus also has something in common with the great Jewish metaphysician Samuel Alexander’s concept of ‘emergent deity’ as expounded in what is arguably the last great work of English metaphysics, Space, Time and Deity.

151Being in itself. The Rebbe’s theology is, therefore, redemptive: to disseminate it

is the messianic mission of him and his followers.

(5) The revelation of Being in itself will massively affirm and valorate the

physical and material, since it is above all through the physical and material that

Being in itself is and will be disclosed.

(6) By altering his perception of the world, Man really and actually transforms

the World, as he collaborates with God to actualize all the potentialities of Creation.

Since both Man and the World participate in Being in itself, what Man does, even

through the act of perceiving, affects the World.

An interesting question arises, which cannot be pursued at length here, but

which it would cowardly not to mention. It is this: where does the Rebbe’s theology

leave the problem of evil? If redemption effectively involves recognizing that the

World is already redeemed, does this mean that evil is an illusion? It might seem

obvious that evil arising from bad human attitudes can be eliminated by changing

Man’s perceptions of the World, but what about ‘natural’ evils, such as earthquakes,

storms, famines, disease? If the physical World is already redeemed are these not

real? I do not know of anywhere that the Rebbe addresses this problem directly and

at length, but I can see a possible line of response that he could have taken. He would

not need to have treated ‘natural’ evils as illusory, nor would he need to have

asserted paradoxically that they are actually ‘good’, or are integral to the revelation

of Atzmus. Following traditional Jewish theology, he could have denied the premise

that one can distinguish between evil caused by Nature and evil caused by Man.

Even natural evils can be traced back to bad human attitudes and actions. Change

these bad attitudes and actions, and even natural evils will disappear. This would be

consonant with his idea that human perceptions, like other human actions, actually

affect the physical world. The fact that the World is, in a sense, already redeemed

does not mean that there is not still a process to be gone through. Man by changing

his perception of the World, co-operates with God to complete the work of Creation,

and bring about the revelation of Atzmus.

152

Chapter 8

The New Torah of the Messianic Age

As we saw in the previous chapter, the messianic era will culminate, according to the

Rebbe’s messianic theology, in the final disclosure of Atzmus, the Essence of God.

We argued that this doctrine of Atzmus is the key to the Rebbe’s messianism. But

there is another idea that is also central, and it forms the subject of the present

chapter. It is that the messianic era will witness a promulgation of a New Torah.

Atzmus and the New Torah are the twin pillars on which the Rebbe’s messianic

theology rests. What is the relationship between them? It is my contention in this

dissertation that the New Torah is, in effect, the doctrine of Atzmus. As will become

clear presently, the Rebbe regards the New Torah as a mystical Torah, the content of

which is already anticipated in Kabbalah and Chasidus. But the ultimate mystery is

the doctrine of Atzmus itself, which he himself expounded.

This is all of a piece with his messianic pretensions. In expounding the New

Torah he was fulfilling the role of the Messiah. He could only do so because he was

the Messiah, and the messianic age was already beginning. In explaining the Rebbe’s

doctrine of the New Torah, I will concentrate on analysing in detail one particularly

important discourse on this subject. This chapter should be read in conjunction with

the discourse, the full text of which can be found in Appendix 1. The key to the

discourse is a verse from Isaiah 51:4, ‘for Torah will emerge from me’. The Rebbe

alters the wording here to ‘for a New Torah will emerge from me’ in the light of

Vayikra Rabbah 13:3. The change, though small, is far from trivial, but this phrase

‘for a New Torah will emerge from me’ becomes a sort of refrain, which is repeated

again and again throughout the discourse. The Me here is first and foremost God (as

in Tanach), and then the Moshiach through whom the New Torah will be given to

Israel, but in the actual delivery of the discourse the audience must have also heard

the Rebbe referring to himself. The discourse was delivered in 1991 at the height of

the speculation on the Rebbe’s messianic claims and potential messianic candidacy.

In the listener’s ear it was inevitable not only that God would blend with the

Moshiach, but also that the Moshiach would in turn blend with the Rebbe. At the very

least the Rebbe is equivocating, or teasing his audience. But I would argue he is

doing much more than that. He was inviting them in a rather direct way to see him as

the Moshiach, and to accept his teachings as the New Torah.

153

The idea that the Messiah will, like a new Moses, propound a New Torah

is, to say the least, controversial within Jewish theology, as the Rebbe’s discourse

recognizes. The eternity and immutability of the Torah was seen by Maimonides as a

fundamental principle of Judaism. Both Christianity and Islam proclaimed New

Torahs which were supposed to supersede the Old Torah. And Shabbetai Zvi very

publicly broke certain mitzvos as a way of proclaiming his messiahship, on the

grounds that in the messianic age the Torah as we know it would no longer apply.

The Rebbe, as we shall see, treads a very fine line here: he argues that the New Torah

is latent in the Old. But if discerning the New Torah in the Old requires the gift of the

Ruach haKodesh, then how does the New Torah differ from prophecy? The Rebbe

himself acknowledges the force of this argument, but he can hardly be said to have

dealt with the problem in a totally convincing way. Moreover, the Halachic changes

which he envisages happening in the messianic age are substantial and radical: what

is now permitted will then be forbidden and vice versa. This surely imposes on no

one. There is a view being propounded here which is at least potentially antinomian.

Other antinomian traditions have also claimed that their New Torah was latent in the

Old Torah and constituted its ‘fulfilment’. This was certainly the line taken in

mainstream Christian theology: Jesus came ‘to fulfil’ the Torah, not to abolish it.

And Shabbetai Zvi, or at least his followers, claimed that his negation of the Torah

was paradoxically its fulfillment (bittulah shel haTorah zehu kiyyumah). The Rebbe

unquestionably flirts with antinomianism, and this is one the most disturbing aspects

of his thought.

In contrast to the previous chapter where I expounded the Rebbe’s doctrine of

Atzmus synchronically and thematically, I have chosen in this chapter to present his

doctrine of the New Torah in the form of a commentary on one particular, very

important discourse. This change of presentation is made possible by the fact that

there happens to be a rich Sicha specifically devoted to the question of the New

Torah. But this mode of presentation serves another purpose as well. It offers the

reader a concrete example of the Rebbe’s style. It is from discourses such as this that

we have to construct his theology. As I noted earlier, deriving a coherent theology

from texts like these is not easy. I have already commented on some of the features

of the Rebbe’s style of discourse: its dizzying density; the technicality of its language

and argument; the use of catchwords and refrains (e.g., ‘for a New Torah will come

forth from me’ — repeated like a mantra throughout this text). But it is important to

note also its logical, orderly, propositional arrangement, which strengthens the

assumption that a coherent philosophy lies behind the Rebbe’s work. Its dry but

intense intellectualism is typical of Chabad. The learning is very obvious: indeed, it

is surely not going too far to say that it is flaunted. The discourse from a literary

154

point of view consists of a mosaic of quotations from a vast range of authorities

both Rabbinic and Hasidic.

The overall rhetorical structure is effective. The discourse starts off with a set

of questions which it explores, but this exploration seems to take us further and

further away from the initial starting point. We seem to get lost in a complex series

of digressions. In the end, however, the Rebbe triumphantly brings these apparent

digressions back to bear on the initial questions, and shows how they answer them.

There is a very striking inclusio, with the opening quotation from Maimonides,

‘therefore the Jewish people will be great geniuses, knowing hidden things and

grasping a knowledge of their Creator’ being picked up again right at the end and

thus framing the discourse. This structure is reminiscent of the structure of the

ancient sermon-type known as the Petichah, though the Rebbe’s discourse is much

longer than any extant Petichah. However, the structure probably serves the same

broad ends: it effectively holds the audience’s attention, as they wait for the

discourse, like a piece of music to return to its home key, and it creates a satisfying

sense of closure when it does so. It displays the cleverness of the preacher. But above

all it demonstrates the unity of the tradition, marrying Oral and Written Torah, and

grounding the doctrine in the holy writings.

Part 1: Moshiach and the New Torah

The first section of the discourse contains all the main themes which will be explored

in detail in the remaining sections. It defines the messianic age as an age dominated

by wisdom, particularly the revelation of divine wisdom. We have already noted on

several occasions the emphasis in the thought of the Rebbe on the noetic character of

salvation. Behind this lies the idea that the Redemption will be achieved through the

acquisition of knowledge. This wisdom is identified as a New Torah. The idea of the

New Torah is grounded in the Midrash which paraphrases the eschatological promise

in Isaiah 51:4 as ‘a New Torah will emerge from Me’. It is a Torah that will come

from God, who is the speaker in the Biblical text, but that Torah will be mediated to

Israel and humanity by a divine agent, the Moshiach.

The King Moshiach is a depicted as a prophet and a teacher. This is in line

with the Rebbe’s spiritualizing interpretation of his role, and it is somewhat ironic

that he brings Maimonides, who saw the Moshiach primarily as a political leader

who would successfully assert Israel’s independence, as his authority for this. For the

Rebbe the Moshiach does not engage in war, nor does he chastise or punish the

world, or convert the Gentiles to Judaism. He teaches them the New Torah.

155

The relationship between this New Torah and the Old Torah is fleetingly

raised. It will be explored in greater depth throughout the discourse. It is represented

as ‘innovations in [the Old] Torah’, as ‘hidden things ... knowledge of the Creator.’

The impression given is that it is not a new scroll or testament, but the disclosure of

levels of mystical meaning that were always there, hidden away in the Torah. And

yet it is also designated ‘prophecy’. How can it be both ‘exegesis’ and ‘prophecy’? Is

it a case of God speaking through the Moshiach or the Moshiach interpreting God’s

words? There is a tension, if not a contradiction, here. Is the idea that the secrets are

hidden so deep in the Old Torah that only a prophetic genius, inspired by the Ruach

HaKodesh, could, with God’s help, be able to find them?

The Moshiach’s function is to teach the New Torah. His reception of it

intellectually transforms him, so that he becomes ‘a genius greater than Solomon and

a prophet approaching the greatness of Moses’. He teaches it to Israel and Israel’s

reception of it intellectually transforms them: they in their turn become ‘great

geniuses’. But the teaching does not end there: it goes out to all humanity. It does not

say here that they will become ‘geniuses’, but the implication must surely be that

they too will be transformed, and in fact the statement is universalized in Part 5. We

may be expected to infer that it is the Jews who will mediate to the Gentiles the

teaching they have received from the Moshiach, that is to say, they will play a

priestly role within humanity. The centrality of the intellect to this process is striking.

Though a prophet, it is through his innate genius that the divine message is received

by the Moshiach and transmitted. In other words it is mediated through his

intellectual faculties. He is not simply a hollow vessel through whom God speaks; he

actively participates in the revelation of the New Torah. There is a perhaps here a

distant echo of Maimonides’ definition of prophecy as the union of the passive

human intellect with the divine Active Intellect. And again it appears to be Israel’s

and the Gentiles’ intellects that are involved in the reception of the New Torah. This

brings us back yet again to the central idea that the process of Redemption is

fundamentally noetic.

Part 2: Two Aspects of the New Torah

In Part 2, the Rebbe begins to explore the themes laid out in Part 1 by offering two

definitions of the New Torah. The first is that it will consist of ‘reasons and secrets of

the Torah’, or ‘secrets and reasons of its concealed facts’, or ‘the inner parts of the

Torah’. This establishes a link with the Old Torah, and takes the view that the New

Torah is hidden within the Old. There is a history to the language here. The search

for the ‘reasons’ for the Torah (Ta’amei haMitzvos) has a long tradition in Jewish

156

thought.298 It has often been understood as the attempt to find the rationale

behind the laws. In many cases this is far from clear, particularly in the case of the

ritual commandments. The ritual laws are often, when viewed objectively, strange,

and provoke the question as to the purpose of their enactment. The classic case was

the law regarding the Red Heifer (parah adumah). In Pesikta deRav Kahana 4:7 a

famous story is told of how a philosopher once attacked the Jews for irrationality

(‘magic’) because they obeyed the laws of the Red Heifer. Rabban Yochanan ben

Zakkai offered him a superficial, rational justification of this law, but later, when the

philosopher had gone, he admitted to his students, who expressed dissatisfaction with

his explanation, that the reasons for these laws are unknown. They are to be blindly

obeyed simply because God has decreed them. Pondering on the reasons for the

commandments opens up a whole area of mystery at the heart of the Torah.

But the language of the ‘secrets’ of the Torah resonates in another way. It

would inevitably have been heard by the Rebbe’s audience as an allusion to

Kabbalah and Chasidus. There is a strong hint that Chasidus, and above all the

Rebbe’s own teaching, anticipates in some way the final revelation of the ‘secrets of

the Torah’ in the messianic age. The ultimate secret to be revealed, according to the

Kabbalah, the revelation of which will finally enable Israel and humanity to realize

Maimonides’ vision of humanity attaining to ‘knowledge of their Creator’, concerns

those ultimately hidden levels within the Godhead, (known as ‘Radla’ - Reshita d’lo

yada) which are hidden even from God himself. As we saw in the previous chapter,

the Rebbe probably identified this concealed aspect of the Godhead with Atzmus. In

other words, the ultimate secret to be revealed, a secret so important as to merit the

designation a New Torah, is the doctrine of Atzmus.

That the fundamental content of the New Torah is the revelation of Atzmus is rather

more clearly stated by the Rebbe in other discourses. Note the following:

In the future to come … ‘a New Torah will come forth from Me.’ At that time there will also be the revelation of Divinity in the world, in ultimate completion and without any concealment at all, as it says, ‘The glory of God shall be revealed and all flesh shall see together, for the mouth of God has spoken.’ For it will be seen in a revealed fashion that the existence of ‘all flesh’ [that is, physicality] is the Godly power that brings it into being ex nihilo, the power of Atzmus, and consequently there is no difference between higher and lower, since they are One …’ 299

298 Schneerson, Rabbi Menachem Mendel (1789-1866). Derech Mitzvosecho. (Hebrew) New York: Kehot Publishing Society. (1993). 299 My italics: Sefer HaSichos 5751, p. 588.

157

This new (aspect of300) Torah revealed from God will be a revelation of the

Essence of God, the ‘Me’ of God as expressed through the Messiah. It is also

interpreted as being the teachings of the Messiah himself,301 i.e., by implication the

Rebbe’s own teachings302. The Essence of Torah is within the Messiah and therefore

within the Rebbe.

The following passage goes even further and makes the claim that the New

Torah does not merely teach about Atzmus, in some sense it embodies or incarnates

Atzmus:

Through the opening verse of the giving of the Torah (on Mount Sinai) which was ‘I am,’ the anagram of which is ‘I put my soul in this book,’ He placed His Atzmus/Essence in the Torah. Through this, it makes [possible] ‘I am Lord your God’ (singular tense) [to be experienced] in each and everyone of Israel. Through the individual working with his [portion of the] Torah efficiently, he draws this into a state of revelation … In addition, the idea that ‘I am your God’ (of Israel), is above the aspect of ‘I am’ that is in the Torah, and it is also known that as the source of Torah and Israel are in Atzmus, the source of Israel transcends the source of the Torah. That Torah is for Israel, only that the revelation of ‘I am your God’ (of Israel) is drawn out through [the] ‘I am’ in the Torah.’303

This ‘knowledge’ of God is not knowledge as one would expect, but rather

experience as the following quotation explains. The ‘Me’ is actually Me, and not

knowledge of Me!

‘For they shall know Me’ … This refers to the actual revelation of Me, no

less; it does not refer to the knowledge and comprehension of the Torah

which includes the knowledge of divinity.304

The Rebbe is at pains to stress the links between the New Torah and the Old,

but inevitably his argument demotes the status of the Old Torah, and raises the

spectre of antinomianism. This downgrading of the Old Torah is later forcefully

expressed at the end of Part 4 of the discourse, by a quotation from Qoheles Rabbah

300 On the concept of a New Torah in the messianic age in classic Rabbinic sources see W.D. Davies, Torah in the Messianic Age and/or the Age to Come (Society of Biblical Literature, 1952). Davies shows that the idea of a New Torah is actually rare in the early texts, which perhaps display sensitivity about the Christian use of this concept. 301 Likkutei Sichos, Parshas Vayigash, 5751/1990, where it is explained at length that from ‘Me’ implies the very essence and being of God. 302 See Sefer HaSichos 5752, Mikdosh Me'at. 303 SeferHa Maamorim Meluket 4, Day 2 of Hag HaShavuos 5729/1969. 304 Sefer HaSichos 5749, vol. 1, p. 159.

158

11:7, ‘The Torah that a person learns in this world is nonsense (or: vanity,

nothing, hevel) compared to the Torah of the Messiah’. The implication is clear. The

Torah that we have now represents only a very partial revelation of the Divine

Essence. It discloses only an aspect of the divine emanations, only a part of the ‘will

and wisdom of God.’ The Rebbe states this with greater clarity elsewhere:

At the time of the giving of the Torah, because the main part of the Torah (which will be revealed in the future to come [the New Torah]) was concealed, there was likewise a corresponding [lack of] revelation of Divinity in the world. This was to such an extent, that the main part — [which is the] power of Atzmus, through which [uniquely] is made possible the bringing [of the world] into existence ex nihilo — was left in concealment.305

Note here again the unequivocal linking of the New Torah with the revelation of

Atzmus, and also the ambiguity of the term ‘Torah’. Does ‘Torah’ mean the Torah

given to Moses on Sinai, or does it mean the Heavenly Torah, of which only part was

drawn down to earth at Sinai, but the main part remained concealed in heaven, to be

revealed as the New Torah in the age to come? That the New Torah constitutes a new

Sinai is hinted at in the discourse here in the words, ‘They [the Jewish people] have a

promise from Him that He will once again appear to them [as he appeared at Sinai],

and reveal the secrets of the reasons and concealed facts.’ Later in the discourse the

Rebbe will take up the subject of whether or not Torah was left in heaven after the

giving at Sinai. It is hard to reconcile all this with any kind of doctrine of the

perfection, eternity and immutability of the Torah of Moses. A Torah that is

incomplete, is, by definition, a Torah that is imperfect. Even if one held that only a

part of the Heavenly Torah was revealed in the Old Torah at Sinai, one could still

posit a connection between the Old Torah and the New. It is not in dispute that the

Old Torah is a manifestation of the Heavenly Torah, so it is bound to anticipate the

New Torah, which will be the full revelation of the Heavenly Torah. What the Old

Torah seems to do with its mysteries and secrets is to point, like a fragment of a

picture, to some fuller Torah that will be manifest in the age to come. There are, of

course, antecedents for this line of thinking in the Zohar, which may have been in the

Rebbe’s mind, though interestingly he constantly grounds his ideas in the text of

what has become, one of the main and accepted pillars of contemporary traditional

Judaism namely Maimonides, rather than in the more ‘dubious’ and controversial

Zohar.306

305 Sefer Sefer HaSichos 5751, p. 588. 306 See I. Tishby, The Wisdom of the Zohar. An Anthology of Texts, Volume 3. Trans. David Goldstein. London: The Littman Library of Jewish Civilization. (1979) pp. 1077-1131.

159

The crucial question of whether the New Torah will in any sense involve

an abrogation of the laws of the Old Torah appears to be answered in the affirmative.

The Rebbe finds allusions to this in the story, which we discussed in the previous

chapter, about the eschatological battle between Leviathan and Behemoth.307

According to this tale Leviathan will kill Behemoth by cutting through its neck with

its fin. However, there is a serious problem here. God will serve up the flesh of

Behemoth to the righteous at the messianic banquet, but how can the flesh of

Behemoth be kosher since it was slaughtered in a Halachically incorrect way, with

the serrated implement, namely the Leviathan’s serrated fin edge? This would

inevitably tear the flesh of the Behemoth in the process of the shechitah, and thus

render it non-kosher. This story then, the Rebbe concludes, points to the fact that the

New Torah in the messianic era ‘will witness the innovation of new laws.’

Parts 3-5: The New Torah and the doctrine of the immutability of Torah

The Rebbe’s argument so far has gone in an alarming direction. The need for a New

Torah seems to call into question the adequacy and finality of the Old Torah. He

meets these objections head on in Part 3 by formulating them forcefully and in full.

He identifies three inter-related problems. The first of these is very succinctly

formulated in the words: ‘How could there possibly be a new Torah, coming out

“from Me”, through Moshiach, in his capacity as a “great prophet”, when it is a

fundamental principle that “it is no longer in Heaven”, and, “it is no longer the

prerogative of a prophet to introduce a new part of the Torah”?’ This is simply

another way of stating what for Maimonides was a fundamental doctrine of Judaism,

viz., the immutability and eternity of the Mosaic Torah.

The second problem which the Rebbe identifies is that the New Torah,

though linked in some way to the Old and latent in it, does not seem to be derived

from it by any the classic modes of exegesis. These he designates by the famous

mnemonic Pardes, which stands for the four classic hermeneutical methods, or levels

of meaning in the Torah: pshat, remez, derash and sod. Because it is not derived by

any or all of these, it appears from the standpoint of our understanding to have the

character of fresh revelation or prophecy direct from God. This immediately recalls

the Rebbe’s claim, quoted in Chapter 2, that Chasidus (and presumably his own form

of Chasidus par excellence) transcends the traditional Pardes, and involves a new and

powerful method of discovering the secrets of Torah which lie beyond traditional

hermeneutics. The implication is clear: the Rebbe’s teachings are an anticipation of

the New Torah.

307 Vayikra Rabbah 13:3.

160

The third problem is a specific variation of the first. How can the fact that an

uneven slaughterer’s knife will be valid in the messianic age — something that

would unquestionably render shechitah invalid now — be reconciled with the claim

that the statutes of the Torah of Moses are for all generations? It is surely a clear

breach of the principle of the eternity of the Torah.

In Part 4, the Rebbe begins to address these questions. He draws an analogy

between the way in which ‘innovation’ (Chiddush) is found in Torah in this age, and

the way in which New Torah will emerge from Old Torah in the age to come. Ever

since Sinai the ‘alert minds’ of the Torah scholars have been discovering Chiddushim

in the Torah. Those Chiddushim, if they are correctly derived, are genuinely theirs,

and are, of course, cited in the tradition in their names. But since they are derived

from the Torah, they can be truly said to be latent within the Torah. The Rebbe is

here dealing with a classic problem relating to the doctrine of the Oral Torah. This

doctrine asserts that the whole of the Oral Torah, as well as the Written Torah, was

given to Moses on Sinai, and that he passed on this Oral Torah to his successors.

However, it is obvious that much of this Oral Torah is actually attributed to Sages

who lived long after Sinai (Rabbi Akiva, Rabbi Ishmael etc). How can their

statements be part of the Oral Torah given to Moses on Sinai? One solution to this

problem is to suppose that Moses heard the Oral Torah on Sinai already recited in the

names of the Sages by whom the traditions would later be delivered. Another

solution is to suppose that the souls of the later Sages were present at Sinai and heard

the traditions then which they were later to recall in a act of anamnesis, like the

Platonic souls recalling the Forms, and recite in their own names. The commonest

explanation, however, and this is the one adopted by the Rebbe, is that what was

given to Moses on Sinai was not the verbatim later statements, but the principles, the

hermeneutical norms (middos), by which the Torah was to be interpreted. Any later

Sage who, by applying these norms to the Torah, discovers something new in it, can

fairly take credit for this Chiddush, but the Chiddush can still be said to have been

given to Moses on Sinai, in the sense that it is derived from the Torah which he

received, through the application of principles which were given to him then.

The relationship between the New Torah and the Old Torah is similar to the

relationship between present-day Chiddushim and the Old Torah. Put very simply,

the New Torah is a Chiddush of the Old. However, there are some important

qualifications to this claim, qualifications which potentially have power to negate, or

seriously weaken, the whole analogy. The Chiddushim which constitute the New

Torah are so deeply buried in the Old that ‘it is impossible for any human mind to

find them’. It will be necessary, therefore, for God, through the agency of the

161

Moshiach his prophet to reveal them, though when they are revealed they will

have the form of Chiddushim (‘Innovative Torah Thoughts’) to the Old Torah. This

fundamental qualitative ‘difference between the innovative insights of “alert minds”

throughout history, and the impending “New Torah”’ raises a serious problem which

the Rebbe does not really address. Will the Chiddushim which constitute the New

Torah be derived from the Old Torah by the standard middos by which the

Chiddushim are derived today, or will some other middos apply? If the former is the

case, then why should these Chiddushim be so hidden as to be inaccessible now? If

the latter, then surely a large part of the analogy falls, and with it the link between the

New Torah and the Old. The Rebbe does not really make a convincing case for the

New Torah as constituting a Chiddush of the Old. He is clearly troubled by the

antinomian implications of the whole concept of a New Torah, and strives hard to

avoid or mitigate them. But he cannot be judged to be wholly successful. When he

says elsewhere (as quoted above) that ‘the main part of the Torah … will be revealed

in the future’ as the New Torah, it is hard not to see the New Torah as more

important than the Old, to sense a denigration of the Torah of Moses. Here too, at the

end of Part 4, having striven valiantly to soften the implications of the doctrine of the

New Torah, he re-ignites the controversy by closing with the provocative words,

‘The Torah that a person learns in this world is nonsense [hevel, breath] compared to

the Torah of the Messiah.’308

In Part 5 he continues to explore the link between the New Torah and the

Old. First he considers the New Torah as a mystical level of the Old Torah. He

concentrates on the role of the intellect of the Moshiach in mediating this at present

unimaginable mystical level of meaning in the Torah given to Moses at Sinai. He

picks up again the idea of the Moshiach as a great genius, by which he evidently

means someone of superlative intellect. Having received the New Torah by

prophecy, he will process this prophecy through his great intellect and articulate its

‘complex ideas in a way that is accessible to the normal human intellect’. He will

condense it ‘into a palatable form’. Behind this is once again the Rebbe’s deep-

seated belief that ultimately salvation is noetic. He expects the messianic age to be

characterized by a huge increase in the intellectual capacity of humanity, which will

make humanity capable of grasping the New Torah. Not only will the Moshiach be a

‘great genius’, but through his ‘palatable’ transmission of the New Torah to ‘all

humanity’ they too will become ‘great geniuses’. Note the universalizing here: in

Part 1, it was the Jewish people who would become ‘great geniuses’. Here it is all

humanity. This is logical: if the Gentiles too receive the New Torah (as Part 1

acknowledges), then they too must surely be transformed by it. This gives some sort

308 Midrash Rabbah, Ecclesiastes 11:7.

162

of explanation of why the ultimate secrets of the Torah of Moses cannot be

discerned now. Humanity has not reached a level of intellectual development to be

able to discern them. The raising of humanity to the higher level, however, will not

come about through some gradual evolution of humanity as a whole. Rather, it will

require the intervention of some great individual of supreme genius to lead humanity

to this higher level of comprehension. It is this individual whom the Rebbe

designates by the traditional term of Moshiach.

The Moshiach’s mediating role is expressed succinctly elsewhere:

… and so too with the King Moshiach, he, as well as being in the ultimate state of greatness, as it says ‘and the spirit of God will rest upon him,’ etc., … and teaching Torah to the Patriarchs and to Moses our teacher; will nevertheless also be in the ultimate state of humility and nullification, and therefore also able to teach, simple people.309

And again:

The main issue (and the underlying unifying oneness of all ideas of the Torah) is the coming of Moshiach. He will teach all the people together the entire Torah completely. [That] also [includes] the hidden Torah, and the hidden of the hidden, as it says ‘Let him kiss me with kisses of the lips.’ Rashi explains, that ‘in the future to come the foundational reasons (of the Torah) and the hidden secrets will be revealed’, and all of this will be apparent in a way of seeing … [This] is also possible and must be now.310

But this teaching role of the Moshiach is not permanent. Once he has taught the New

Torah and raised humanity to his own level, so that they too become geniuses, then a

state will be reached in which ‘one man will no longer teach his neighbour’. The

revelation and its transforming absorption by humanity in the messianic age will

subvert the hierarchical relationship between student and teacher, ordinary Jew and

prophet. There will ultimately be equality and independence for all:

Moreover and this is the main thing: … In the true and final redemption (through our righteous redeemer) … we will learn the inner dimensions of Torah (the knowledge of God) in total completion, as it is written: ‘Let him kiss me with the kisses of the mouth...’ Which will be [in a way of] speaking with him mouth to mouth, since ‘a New Torah will issue forth from Me,’ ‘From Me’ literally. The learning will be in a way that, ‘One man will no longer teach his friend... because ALL WILL KNOW ME!’311 More than this,

309 Sefer Maamorim Meluket, 6, p. 84, Kuntres 5th Tevet 5752/1992 (originally 5732/1972). 310 -The light [night] of 13th of Tishrei (the birthday of the Rebbe Rashab) 5743/1983. Sefer Maamorim Meluket, 1, p. 446. 311 Jeremiah 31:33.

163in a way of seeing, ‘And God appeared to him,’ ... ‘and our eyes will see our teacher,’ 312 ‘a New Creation.’313

The Rebbe then turns to consider the New Torah in the sense of new laws

which contradict those of the Old Torah, as represented by the permissibility of a

serrated edge in shechitah. He disposes of the possibility that the use of the serrated

edge might be a case of ‘a temporary exemption clause.’ The legal concept here is

that a prophet has the authority to overrule any commandment of the Torah (except

for the prohibition of idol worship), provided it is only for a specific case, or a short

period of time. Could the legal innovations of the messianic era be simply temporary

exemptions granted by prophets? The Rebbe argues no, and with good reason. If this

were the case, then the New Torah would hardly be ‘new’ in any meaningful sense.

The principle of a ‘temporary exclusion clause’ already exists, and can be illustrated

from the story of Elijah on Carmel, in which, in his capacity as a prophet, he

sanctioned the offering of sacrifice outside the Temple mount in contradiction of

Deuteronomy 12:13. The permissibility of the serrated edge is a genuine chiddush,

but as a chiddush it does not necessarily negate or even contradict the existing laws

of shechitah. What may become clear is that the existing laws of shechitah do not

apply in this case, just as it could be argued with regards to the sacrifice on Mount

Carmel that it ‘is not a sanction to transgress the prohibition of slaughtering

sacrifices outside the Temple; rather, the prohibition of slaughtering sacrifices

outside the Temple never applied in this case.’ What the Rebbe is concerned to avoid

here is the appearance of abrogating any part of the Mosaic Law. The permissibility

of a serrated edge in shechitah appears to abrogate the existing law. If a serrated edge

may be used, then stipulating a smooth edge makes no sense. If one may use either a

smooth or a serrated edge, then the restriction of using only a smooth edge is

annulled. The Rebbe firmly asserts that such abrogation is not in view. How

abrogation is not involved can be left to the great mind of the Moshiach to explain,

though the Rebbe cannot resist giving him a hint as to how it might be done, namely

by demonstrating that — somehow — the normal laws of shechitah do not apply in

this case.314 (He will return to this later.) Thus a possible discontinuity between the

312 The Rebbe was probably talking about the Previous Rebbe, his father-in-law Rabbi Yoseph Yitzchak Schneerson, but his words have been understood by the messianic sect to mean that he was prophesying his own demise and eventual return. 313 Sefer Ha Sichos 5752/1992, volume 1, p. 93. 314 What the Rebbe seems to be hinting at is that the Chiddush of the New Torah is not necessarily an abrogation or contradiction of the Old Torah, either absolutely, or as the result of the temporary prophetic suspension of the Old Torah. It emerges from Torah law, and is therefore, technically speaking, not a negation of the Torah at all, but a negation of our own limited understanding Torah law. He cites two examples of what he means, by noting two cases where apparent negations of Sabbath law actually constitute a greater observance of the Sabbath. The first of these involves the principle of pikkuach nefesh, ‘transgression’ of the Sabbath in order to save life. Pikkuach nefesh is not only a commandment, but also a supreme fulfilment of the Sabbath. The other example is that of

164

New Torah and the Old is argued away, and the principle that the New is latent in

the Old defended.

At the end of Part 5, the Rebbe advances a further argument for continuity

between the New Torah and the Old. It is that the legal chiddushim of the New Torah

will be legislated into law by the Great Sanhedrin, applying exactly the procedures

(‘the existing principles and logic of Torah’) that apply to the legislation of the Old

Torah. The Moshiach will have to convince the Great Sanhedrin that these legal

chiddushim should be enacted. Though he has received the New Torah by prophetic

revelation, he will have to present it in the way that ‘innovative Torah thoughts’ are

presented in this age. The chances that the Sanhedrin will not be convinced by the

messianic genius is, of course, nil, but still the Rebbe seems to think that the

principle is worth defending that Moshiach will not be able to impose chiddushim on

his own authority (though he is a prophet). He will have to present them as

chiddushim of the Mosaic Torah.

Parts 6-8, 12-14 The rulings of the School of Shammai anticipate the New Torah

Up to this point the Rebbe has worked with a dual definition of the New Torah, first

as ‘secrets’ of the Old Torah, and second as legal innovations. He turns now to the

problem of how these two aspects of the New Torah are related, for related they must

surely be. He poses the question sharply: ‘What could be the connection between a)

the “innovation in Torah” … and b) the revelation of secrets of the Torah — a

connection so strong that this innovation in Jewish law will only be revealed in the

future with the secrets of the “New Torah that will come out from Me”?’ The answer

in principle is contained in his formulation of the question: ‘the future change in

halacha [will be] a result of a more lofty understanding of Torah.’ In other words,

the legal chiddushim are part of the ‘secrets of the Torah.’ He does not, however, go

into this in detail, but launches into a long and complex digression which discusses

the ancient halachic differences between the School of Shammai and the School of

Hillel.

In the course of this discussion the Rebbe attempts to make a number of

points. He argues that since a Bas Kol (Heavenly Voice) proclaimed that the

contradictory opinions of the two Schools are equally ‘words of the Living God’, we

can deduce that that within the Torah as we know it ‘many aspects … can exist as

two contradictory ideas both of which are true.’ This view is reinforced by a Midrash

the sacrificing of the two he-lambs on the Sabbath in the Temple, which is also seen as a fulfilment of the Sabbath, despite the fact that prima facie the act of sacrificing involves a ‘desecration’ of the Sabbath.

165

which states that God communicated to Moses forty-nine arguments in favour of

declaring something ‘pure’, and forty-nine arguments for declaring it ‘impure’. Thus

two contradictory conclusions can be reached by legitimate argument from the same

Torah. The matter is resolved by the majority vote of the Sages of the Great

Sanhedrin, and they happen to have declared that the views of the School of Hillel

should prevail. However, the Great Sanhedrin can always change its mind, and

actualize the potential of the Torah in favour of the opinions of the School of

Shammai over the School of Hillel, and this is, in fact, what will happen in the

messianic age. In other words the opinions of the School of Shammai anticipate the

New Torah of the messianic age: ‘there will be a change of heart, and the law will be

fixed in accordance with the School of Shammai.’

Why should the opinions of the School of Shammai prevail in the messianic

age? To answer this question the Rebbe draws on two well-known characteristics of

the School of Shammai. First, the Talmud says that ‘they were of sharper mind’315

than the School of Hillel. Their insight into Torah was more acute than that of the

Hillelites. They were, therefore, closer to the views of Torah which will prevail in the

messianic era, which will be marked, as we saw, by a huge increase in insight into

the Torah. There is probably an allusion here to the Aggadah to the effect that the

celestial Beis Din always sides with Shammai. But this raises a problem. If the legal

reasoning of the Shammaites was more acute, why did the halachah not follow

them? Why follow the majority when their reasoning is arguably inferior? The Rebbe

answers that it was precisely to affirm the principle of majority vote that the Bas Kol

went forth. Normally, in keeping with the famous ruling in Bava Metzia 59a-b, we

do not listen to a Bas Kol in legal matters. Here, however, it was needed to clear up

any confusion and assert the validity of majority vote. Acuteness of mind is not the

basis of legislation, but legal consensus. Rabbi Meir was ‘the wisest of his

generation’ yet, because ‘his colleagues could not fathom the depth of his wisdom’,

his views were not always enacted. Second, the School of Shammai was noted for its

stringency and the School of Hillel for its leniency. The long discussion of this issue

boils down to this: the stringency of the School of Shammai was related to their

attempt to legislate against potential evil; the leniency of the School of Hillel was

related to their attempt to legislate only against actual evil. This again forges a link

between the Shammaite views and the New Torah. How?

The messianic age will come about through a refining of the world, which

will result in the elimination of actual evil acts, but what will still remain will be the

potential for evil, as in the time before the sin of Adam. There was no actual evil in

315 Talmud Yevamos 14a.

166

the world then, but the potential for it existed, and that potential was disastrously

realized. What will be required of the New Torah in the messianic age will be to

eliminate the potential for evil, in effect to eliminate the evil inclination316 and to

prevent another Fall. Since the Shammaites tried to legislate precisely to address the

potential for evil, their opinions are closer to the New Torah of the messianic age

which will eliminate the potential for evil, and their opinions will in due course be

legislated into law by the eschatological Great Sanhedrin.

The Rebbe’s argument turns heavily on the claim that we can anticipate

something of the New Torah here and now. Though we cannot derive it from the Old

Torah it is not entirely beyond our knowledge. It is hinted at and alluded to in the

Old Torah — in the mitzvos for which we can at present give no reason; in the

potentialities of Torah which have never been legislated into law; in the actual laws

which have never been implemented (as in the ruling that there should be nine Cities

of Refuge, rather than the actual six); in the hints that in the messianic age there will

be legal chiddushim which would not be permissible now (as in the story of

Leviathan’s fin); and, finally, in the rulings of the School of Shammai, which,

although their regal reasoning is more acute than those of the School of Hillel, have

for the most part not been implemented in this age. All of these are pointers in this

age to the Torah of the age to come.

In Part 14 the Rebbe cites one case, in which, contrary to normal practice,

legislation in this era went with the School of Shammai, and he sees this as

illustrating his idea that that Shammaite rulings anticipate ‘the state of affairs in the

messianic era.’ It happens that the law in question relates to the observance of the

festival of Shavuos, which commemorates the giving of the Torah at Sinai. He hints

that this acceptance of the opinion of the School of Shammai alludes to the

promulgation of the New Torah in the messianic age, and to the fact that the

Shammaite rulings in general foreshadow the New Torah. The ruling under

discussion concerns the question of when the festival’s offerings should be

sacrificed. The School of Hillel allowed the sacrifices to be offered on the day of the

festival itself, but the School of Shammai stipulated that they should be offered on

the day after the festival. The view of the School of Shammai in this instance

prevailed. The Rebbe sees this as a parable of the messianic era. The celebration of

the giving of the Mosaic Torah on Shavuos was followed by the slaughtering of the

sacrificial victims. So the giving of the New Torah will be followed by a

slaughtering, a slaying of the Evil Inclination. This ties in with argument that the

316 Talmud Sukkah 52a, “In the days to come, God will bring the evil inclination and slaughter it”. Also see Zacharia 13:2 and Likkutei Sichos, vol 6, p. 22.

167

thrust of the Shammaite rulings is to eliminate the potential for evil. The

Shammaite rulings are, in effect, attacking the Evil Inclination. The destruction of the

inclination towards evil will be a necessary feature of the messianic era, and crucial

if the world is to achieve perfection and not lapse again into sin.

Parts 9-11, 15-16 The Cities of Refuge and the annihilation of the Evil Inclination

In part 9, in the middle of his discussion of the differences between the School of

Shammai and the School of Hillel, the Rebbe goes off on another digression, this

time concerning the Biblical laws regarding the cities of refuge. Again in these laws

he sees a remez of the New Torah. He begins once more with Maimonides who notes

that the law in Deuteronomy 19:8-9, ‘When the Lord your God enlarges your border

… then you shall add three more [Cities of Refuge] for you’, was never

implemented. Six Cities of Refuge were established, but the three additional cities

were not. As Maimonides observes, ‘God does not make superfluous

commandments’, and from this the Rebbe concludes that this particular

commandment ‘will be carried out in the messianic era, when there will be an

addition (and perfection) in the mitzvah of separating the Cities of Refuge.’ He then

begins to speculate on the significance of the setting up of three additional Cities of

Refuge in the messianic age. Again he detects an allegory. These three additional

Cities of Refuge cannot be literal cities, since there will be no more murder, whether

intentional or unintentional, in the messianic age. Rather the Cities of Refuge stand

for the ‘words of Torah’ which are a refuge. They symbolize the Torah as a refuge

against one’s ‘personal avenger of blood’, the Inclination to do Evil. The Torah is, of

course, an antidote to sin and the Evil Inclination now. There are already six Cities of

Refuge, which symbolize the Six Orders of the Mishnah. The study of these

undoubtedly keeps the Evil Inclination in check, but it does not eliminate it. There

will need to be a further revelation of Torah in the messianic age, corresponding to

the three additional cities, which will negate for ever the possibility of evil: ‘This

(prevention of the possibility of evil) will be achieved by the introduction of a new

type of City of Refuge (three new cities) — i.e., the revelation of new mystical

teachings, which (as mentioned earlier) transcend any connection with refining good

from evil. This influx of mystical studies will provide protection against even the

possibility of evil.’ The three additional Cities of Refuge are a symbol of the ‘secrets’

of the Torah, the revelation of which in the messianic era will overwhelm and

annihilate the Evil Inclination, and so prevent the possibility of any further eruption

of evil. This interpretation is reinforced by a Midrash on Deuteronomy 19:8-9.

Following Maimonides, the Rebbe notes that the three additional Cities of Refuge

will be located in the ‘lands of Kani, Knizi and Kadmoni, which were covenanted to

168

Abraham our father but remain to be conquered’. The Land which was actually

conquered was the land of the seven nations, who here stand for the ‘emotional

attributes of the soul’ whose conquest is the task of the current era, applying the Old

Torah. The land of the three nations corresponds to the ‘three intellectual faculties317

of the soul which will be refined in the messianic era when the “New Torah that will

come out from Me” will be revealed.’

In Parts 15-16 the Rebbe returns to the legend of the fight between Leviathan

and Behemoth with which he opened the discourse, and recapitulates all the major

themes on which he has touched, weaving them together into an effective ending. He

now allegorizes Behemoth and Leviathan. As we saw in the previous chapter of this

dissertation, Leviathan is regarded as an appropriate symbol for the unseen, spiritual

world, and Behemoth as an appropriate symbol for the physical world. The slaying of

Leviathan and Behemoth denotes the elimination of the dualism between the spiritual

and the physical. The idea behind Leviathan slaughtering and elevating Behemoth is

that in the messianic age ‘the loftiest spiritual lights (Leviathan) will be revealed

below (Behemoth).’ This will only be possible through a divine ‘shechitah’ which

will not be in accordance with the laws of shechitah as we know them. It is not

strictly speaking in contradiction to the shechitah of the Old Torah, since it only

envisages shechitah as performed by God, not as performed by humans. This will be

a divine slaughtering, which symbolizes the fact that the final elimination of the Evil

Inclination, and with it the possibility of a further lapse into sin, and the overcoming

of the dualism between spirit and matter, will be achieved only by a new revelation

of God himself, which God himself alone will be able to initiate, a revelation of His

inner essence, of Atzmus.

There is a great deal more that could be said about this discourse. In a sense I

have only scratched its surface, but I have said sufficient to set out the main ideas of

the Rebbe’s central doctrine of the New Torah. The main results of our analysis can

be summarized as follows:

(1) The messianic age will be characterized by the revelation of a New Torah. The revealer of that New Torah will be the Moshiach who will act as a second Moses to transmit this New Torah to the Jewish people and the humanity at large.

(2) This New Torah is latent in the Old Torah, the Torah given to Moses on Sinai. All sorts of hints of it can be found in the Old Torah. If this were not the case then the New Torah would lie totally beyond the horizon of our knowledge. Though we are not in a position now to say much about its content, we have incontestable signs that such a New Torah will be promulgated.

317 Which correspond to Wisdom, Knowledge and Understanding -the anagram ‘Chabad’.

169

(3) The promulgation of this New Torah will perfect the Old Torah. The Old

Torah effectively only deals with evil acts, it does not eliminate the possibility of

evil. It can never totally do away with the Inclination to Evil. The New Torah will

annihilate the Evil Inclination and so preclude the possibility of another Fall.

(4) The refining of the intellect will be the starting-point for the

transformation of humanity and the world. The Moshiach will receive the New Torah

‘by prophecy’, that is to say by direct revelation from God. He will then, using his

superlative intellect, express it in forms intelligible to ordinary mortals. They will

absorb it by their intellects and in turn be transformed, and raised to the level of the

Moshiach. The transformation does not remain, however, purely on the intellectual

plane. There is a total transformation of reality: the dualism between spirit and matter

will be overcome. The reason for this is that the New Torah is not just a revelation

about God; it is the revelation of God in his most hidden Essence, Atzmus, and such a

revelation will inevitably lead to the transformation of the world.

(5) The rhetorical setting of the discourse generates all sorts of ambiguities

and ironies which cannot have been lost on its hearers. It was delivered at the height

of the messianic fervour, and it must surely have been hard for those who heard it not

to conclude that they were actually hearing the Moshiach beginning to expound the

mysteries of the New Torah. The Rebbe was surely doing more than simply

gathering together the signs in this age that point to the New Torah of the messianic

age. In his doctrine of Atzmus he was beginning to unveil the content of the New

Torah itself. He was acting like the Moshiach in making that New Torah ‘palatable’,

that is to say, in dressing it up in garb of the ‘innovative Torah thoughts’ of this age.

But if this was the case, then he cannot have been merely anticipating the Moshiach.

He must be the Moshiach, and the messianic era must be dawning.

170

PART THREE

CONTEXTUALIZING THE REBBE’S MESSIANISM

The purpose of the third section of the present dissertation is to put the Rebbe’s

messianic doctrine into historical perspective. The questions which I shall attempt to

address here are: To what extent were the Rebbe’s ideas anticipated by previous

messianic thinking within Judaism, and to what extent are they new? In particular,

where do the Rebbe’s messianic ideas stand within the development of Hasidic

thought, and what light do they throw on the history of that movement, and on

Scholem’s famous and controversial claim that Hasidism represents the

‘neutralization of Messianism’. And where do the Rebbe’s messianic teachings and

the turmoil within Hasidism, and more widely within the Jewish world, over the

Rebbe’s messianic status, leave relations between Habad and Jewish Orthodoxy?

What has been the theological reaction within Orthodox, mitnaggedic circles to the

emergence of a powerful messianic movement within Habad? In this section it will

be necessary to revisit some evidence already considered earlier, particularly in

Chapters 5 and 7, but to view it from a rather different perspective. The issues raised

are large and complex, and cannot be treated exhaustively here. The best that can be

attempted is to probe the evidence and to hope that what we find offers some clear

hypotheses that can be tested by more exhaustive investigation.

171

Chapter 9

The Rebbe’s Messianism

in the Context of the History of Jewish Messianism

The Jewish messianic tradition is rich and diverse,318 and it is hardly surprising that

parallels to the Rebbe’s messianic ideas can be found in the writings of earlier Jewish

messianic thinkers. These parallels may result from shared use of the great, classic

Jewish sources that have helped to define traditional views of Jewish messianism,

such as the biblical Prophets, the Talmud, the Midrash, the Siddur (particularly major

prayers such as the Amida), and Maimonides. Other similarities inevitably arise once

a real, live person has been identified as ‘Messiah’, or belief in an imminent or

realized eschatology has been embraced. Thus there are obvious, and sometimes

striking, parallels between the Rebbe as Messiah and Chabad as a messianic

movement, on the one hand, and earlier Jewish Messiahs and their movements (e.g.

Jesus and early Christianity, or Shabbetai Zevi and Sabbateanism), on the other, but

what one should make of these similarities is hotly contested. Again, parallels will

arise, not only because the same motifs and ideas have been borrowed from the

classic, exoteric sources, but also because these has been interpreted in the light of

the same esoteric, mystical traditions. Thus the application of mystical ideas and

speculative Kabbalah can largely account for the ‘spiritualization’ of traditional

messianic teaching in the writings of Abulafia, Yitzchak Luria, the Baal Shem Tov

— and the Rebbe. That the Rebbe’s messianic teachings should have antecedents is

not surprising. Nevertheless, I would argue that although he gleaned many ideas

from the immense breadth of the traditional Jewish sources, he is a highly distinctive

and original thinker, who has discovered his own idiosyncratic voice and particular

messianic vision. But that idiosyncrasy, for a variety of reasons, is disclosed in an

oblique way, and in subtle differences of nuance and emphasis.

As mentioned in Chapter 5, the two main and most overtly influential sources

for the Rebbe’s messianism are Maimonides and the Baal Shem Tov, both of whom

318 Idel, Moshe. Messianic Mystics New Haven and London: Yale University press. (1998), and Scholem, Gershom. Sabbatai Sevi, the Mystical Messiah. Trans. R.J. Zwi Werblowsky. New Jersey: Princeton University Press. 1973, and Scholem, The Messianic Idea in Judaism, and other essays on Jewish Spirituality. New York: Schocken Books, Inc. 1995.

172have their own conceptions of the nature of the messiah and of what is to be

expected in the messianic era. The Rebbe’s reading of Maimonides has certain

similarities to the ideas of two earlier Jewish messianic thinkers, the Spanish ecstatic

Kabbalist Abraham Abulafia (13th century),319 and the Sabbatean Avraham Miguel

Cardozo (1626-1706),320 for both of whom a mystical reading of Maimonides321 was

central to the formation of their respective messianic theologies.

It may be a shared mystical reading of Maimonides (influenced in particular

by Zoharic and Lurianic ideas) that led both the Rebbe and Cardozo to claim that the

messianic era will be marked by a powerful and specific revelation of the divine.

They both envision a new theology as the goal or outcome of the manifestation of the

messianic era.322 Fundamental to the Rebbe’s messianism, and one of its hallmarks,

is his belief in the centrality of the theological revelation of Atzmus, which will

constitute the defining characteristic of the messianic era. This view has, indeed,

certain apparent similarities to ideas espoused by earlier Chasidic masters within the

Chabad fraternity, who envisioned a particular type of divine revelation connected

with the world to come, one which will reveal Godly lights, as they are manifested

through the magical and cosmic Hebrew letters, which are said both to sustain and to

animate the world, bringing it from a state of non-existence into a state of being.323

However, the nature of this ‘Godly’ revelation is in no way comparable to the

revelation of a completely new theology, which is what the Rebbe ultimately

postulates. The distinction becomes even more piquant when one considers the harsh

reality of Atzmus and the radically contrasting nature of its revelation. Atzmus, as I

argued earlier (Chapter 7), is not concerned with the concept of revelation per se, nor

does it complicate itself by specifying any mechanized combinations of a pulsating

spiritual alphabet, that create the world. The Baal Shem Tov himself, in sharp

contrast to the Rebbe, does not explicitly express any belief in a new messianic

Torah, nor does he seem to point to any radically new revelation of God as defining

the messianic era, though he does seem to hold that his own esoteric teachings have

319 Idel, Messianic Mystics. Chapter Two, Idel, Abraham Abulafia: Ecstatic and Spiritual Messianism. New Haven and London: Yale University press. (1998); also Scholem, Gershom. Sabbatai Sevi, pp. 120-145. 320 Halperin, David J. Abraham Miguel Cardozo –Selected Writings. New York: Paulist Press. (2001). 321 Halperin. Abraham Miguel Cardozo p. 16. 322 Halperin. Abraham Miguel Cardozo p. 61. 323 Rabbi Schneur Zalman of Liadi, Shaar Yichud ve Emuna the third section of Tanya Chapter 7, p. 164.

173transformative and redemptive qualities, that can help individuals to attain states

of messianic consciousness, a point to which we shall return below.

If there are no clear antecedents to the Rebbe’s new Torah within Hasidic

thought, can the centrality of the belief in a new and specific theological revelation

destined for the eschaton be convincingly paralleled from within the normative

tradition? The short answer again appears to be no. It is true that classic texts do from

time to time make claims along the lines that ‘hidden secrets and the reasons for the

Torah will be revealed by the messiah in the end of days’. However, these mystical

secrets have rarely been explicitly understood as a revelation of a radically new

theology, or a radically new Torah.324 There is a world of difference between saying

that the Torah we know will yield up its final mysteries in the messianic age, under a

new outpouring of the Ruach HaKodesh and the teaching of the Messiah, and

claiming that a new, unheard-of Torah will be revealed, that a new ‘Sinai’ will occur.

The former idea is well enough attested in the classic sources. The latter, however,

with its disturbing antinomian undertones, is very rarely found, at least explicitly, not

articulated.

One might be tempted to argue that the source of the Rebbe’s belief actually

does lie in the last chapter of Maimonides’ Mishneh Torah, which describes both the

personality of the messiah and the nature of the messianic era. Maimonides states

there that, in the messianic era, ‘…the Jewish people will be great geniuses, knowing

hidden esoteric things… of their Creator,’325 and ends his entire work by quoting

Isaiah’s prediction that at the end of history ‘the world will be filled with the

knowledge of God’326 Interestingly this very verse is also cited in the Zohar327 in

connection with a messianic revelation which may have been the Rebbe’s source.

‘Said R. Judah: ‘God will one day reveal the hidden mysteries of the Torah, namely, at the time of the Messiah, because “the earth shall be full of the knowledge of the Lord like as the waters cover the sea” (Isa. XI, 9), and as it is written, “They shall teach no more every man his neighbour and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord, for they shall all know me, from the least of them to the greatest of them” (Jeremiah 31:34)

324 Davies, W.D. Torah in the Messianic Age and/or the Age to Come, Society of Biblical Literature, 1952. 325 Hilchos Melachim 12:5 326 Isaiah 11:9. 327 Soncino Zohar, Vayikra, Section 3, p. 23a

174

It is entirely plausible that a mystical orientation both towards Maimonides

and this passage328 might result in extra emphasis being placed on this rather poetic

peroration to his messianic chapter. The Rebbe certainly read Maimonides in an

unusual way. He understood everything that Maimonides wrote as having normative,

halachic status, even statements that would commonly be regarded as being aggadic

in character. Additionally, he invokes the Zohar’s statement (based on the Sefer

Yetzira) that ‘the end is lodged in the beginning and the beginning in the end’,329 to

justify giving particular meaning to these final words of Maimonides as summing up

the message of his entire work. He therefore puts much more stress on the last

sentence of the Mishneh Torah, than would be deemed appropriate in a more

historical or academic reading, and sees much more significance in it. If this

innovative hermeneutical approach is accepted, then the idea that a new theological

revelation is destined to occur at the end of days might not seem too far-fetched.

Maimonides himself can be claimed to support the view that an outpouring of

knowledge of the divine will be the final chapter in the messianic unfolding, which is

what Isaiah meant by the world being ‘filled with the knowledge of God’. However,

it is hard to suppress the sense that this is a case of special pleading, which involves a

zoharically influenced reading of Maimonides. It is improbable that the great

halakhist Maimonides was in fact advocating the concept of a new Torah in the

messianic age, and there is no express reference to such a doctrine elsewhere in his

voluminous writings. The Rebbe is unlikely to have discovered this concept in the

Maimonidean passage, but rather, having discovered it within the Zohar and the

Midrash, he found justification for it here in Maimonides.

As I hinted earlier, some interesting parallels to the Rebbe’s belief in the

centrality of a radical new understanding of the Divine, and thus of an altogether new

theology, in the messianic era can be found in the messianism of Avraham Cardozo.

Cardozo was one of the most accomplished theologians of the Sabbatean movement,

who, while living in Spain, studied Christian theology, along with medicine, at the

University of Salamanca. For Cardozo it was the very presence of Shabbetai Zevi as

the historical messiah that necessitated the revelation of a new theology. He held that

the true nature of God, the Sod haElohut, had only been disclosed with the coming of

328 Soncino Zohar, Vayikra, Section 3, p. 23a, Shemoth, Section 2, p. 68a. 329 Sefer Yetzirah Mishnat Zayin (Chapter 7) 1:7.

175Shabbetai. Though he claimed that only Shabbetai had truly understood the

nature of God, Cardozo’s theology actually owed little or nothing to Shabbetai

himself, but was validated by visions and revelations which he himself received from

a maggid. Like the early Gnostics he distinguished between a First Cause and the

God of Israel, who emanated from the First Cause, but unlike the Gnostics, he rather

discounted the First Cause and placed supreme value rather on the God of Israel, the

God of revelation, who was to be worshipped through studying the Torah and

keeping the mitzvot. Thus, despite his novel theology, he was supportive of tradition.

Cardozo believed not only that his own newly revealed theology was important for

the redemption of Israel, and even of the God of Israel Himself, but also that he

personally was in some sense a messianic figure (the Messiah son of Joseph), though,

under pressure, he was later, at least publicly, to recant this claim. Shabbetai did not

seem to have been overly impressed with Cardozo’s new God, but neither did he feel

particularly compelled to create or invent a radical new messianic theology of his

own. The similarities between the Rebbe’s ideas and Cardozo’s are intriguing. Both

seemed to have studied Christian theology, both stressed the centrality of a new

theology to the messianic age; both came up with theologies that were in significant

ways alien to traditional Judaism; both appealed to Maimonides as an authority to

justify their beliefs; both, though radical in theology, were not actually antinomian in

practice. However, one should not over press the parallelism. The nature of the ‘God’

revealed, and the manner and process of his disclosure, are in each case very

different. With the principle that a new theology will be central to the messianic age,

and with a more mystical interpretation of Maimonides’ messianism, the similarities

between the Rebbe’s and Cardozo’s messianic thinking effectively come to an end.

There are also fascinating and striking parallels between the messianism of

the Rebbe and the messianism of Abraham Abulafia. For both Maimonides was

central to their theological development, and both overtly appeal to him as the basis

of their messianic thinking: both interpret his works in a curiously mystical manner,

which most readers find surprising and against the grain of the great philosopher’s

thought. Both seem to interpret Maimonides’ neo-Aristotelian concept of ‘union with

the Active Intellect’ in salvific terms, as marking the spread of a messianic

consciousness. Both see personal redemption as the key to universal redemption, and

for both the messianic message is not restricted to Jews but includes non-Jews as

well.

176

However, as with Cardozo, there are important differences of emphasis to be

observed. Since Abulafia identifies union with the Active Intellect as equivalent to

the state of prophecy, and at the same time sees the state of prophecy as salvific, it is

natural that he wants all his disciples, indeed all Israel, to attain to this state. If the

messianic era is to be realised, prophecy will, in effect, have to become the norm, a

condition enjoyed by all. Abulafia’s distinctive claim, his personal messianically

redemptive role, was to teach people the magical rituals and self-hypnotic techniques

by which they could attain the state of prophecy, and so work out their own

salvation. This position is reminiscent of the Beshtian rituals suggested in his famous

letter, which seem designed to help the Chasidim to attain levels of personal

redemption. The Rebbe, in sharp contrast, appears to have restricted the expression

of messianic and prophetic phenomena to the personality of the messiah, which in

this case only includes the Previous Rebbe and himself. In both cases the renaissance

of prophecy signifies the beginning of the messianic redemption, but for the Rebbe

prophecy seems to be more of a way of affirming his messianic status and the truth

of his pronouncements than a vehicle for achieving messianic consciousness. The

distinction here is finer that might at first sight appear to be the case. Abulafia,

Cardozo, the Baal Shem and the Rebbe all share the somewhat Gnostic belief that the

messianic era will be marked by the disclosure of a previously hidden, divine

knowledge, and that this theological revelation, in addition to being a key aspect of

the messianic era, is also in some way personally redemptive both for the individual

teaching or revealing it, i.e. the messianic personality, and for those receiving and

learning it, his followers and/or the world en masse.

Maimonides provides the historical and halachic framework for building and

defining the conceptual landscape for both the revelation of the messianic personality

and for the unfolding of the messianic era. The Baal Shem Tov, by way of contrast,

like Abulafia, is more practically orientated and provides the mystical and

evangelical tools which set in motion the spiritual mechanisms which underpin the

messianic era, and through which it can be brought about. There is an interesting

parallelism between the Baal Shem’s and Maimonides’ visions of the messianic

unfolding, at least on the surface. Both foresee its development as being organic and

historical, both apparently painting a picture of an almost natural evolution from the

177world of exile towards the messianic utopia, although the process of this

transition is somewhat different.

Maimonides pictures this messianic development as being brought about via

the imposition of a great genius of a messianic king, who slowly coerces the Jewish

people and then the entire world to submit to the will of God and to live in peace and

harmony. The Baal Shem Tov describes, or at least alludes to, a scenario, which at

first glance seems to have decentred the importance of the messianic personality. He

opts for a more spiritually oriented mechanism by which the messianic era will be

brought about, namely via an evangelical, Chasidic/messianic movement, which

attempts to help individuals achieve higher states of messianic consciousness and/or

experiences of personal redemption, firstly transforming the Jewish people and then

perhaps the entire world. Maimonides’ historical, ‘political’ view of the messianic

unfolding and the Baal Shem’s mystical vision of the spiritual redemption of

individuals en masse seem to stand in stark contrast to each other. The Rebbe can be

seen as creating an innovative synthesis of these two very different conceptions of

the development of the messianic process. In forming this hybrid between the

halachic and the mystical, the Rebbe seems to have given a strangely mystical

reading of Maimonides and a more concrete and historical or halachic interpretation

of the Baal Shem. On the one hand he seems at times deliberately to spiritualize

Maimonides’ clearly defined halachic, historical concepts; on the other, he seems to

render the Baal Shem’s vision of the unfolding of Chasidism and the inevitable

messianic implications that it carries in rather concrete, political, Maimonidean

terms.

There are, then, certain interesting antecedents of the Rebbe’s thought in the

history of Jewish messianic theology. One can identify within the tradition a small

number of messianic thinkers (Maimonides, Abulafia, Cardozo, the Besht) with

whom his ideas may fruitfully be compared, but as the foregoing rapid comparison

shows, he has no exact forerunner. What is striking is how few antecedents of any

kind can be found to his thinking on one of the central concepts of Jewish theology,

which has generated an enormously rich tradition. Quite apart from his highly

original doctrine of Atzmus, his precise understanding of how the messianic era will

unfold does not, as a whole, seem to have any close parallels within the classical

Jewish tradition.

178

Chapter 10

The Rebbe and the Problem of Hasidic Messianism

The appearance or ‘reappearance’ of messianism within Chabad, raises important

questions for the general study of Hasidism within the academic world, most

importantly with regard to the debate on Scholem’s thesis about the ‘neutralisation’

of Messianism within Hasidism, and with regard to the nature of Hasidism itself.330

A number of questions naturally arise. Does Lubavitch messianism by definition

provide evidence against Scholem? The powerful upsurge of messianism within

Chabad is surely, on the face of it, puzzling and unpredictable on Scholem’s

hypothesis. Does the belief in the apparent eschatological fulfilment of the Baal

Shem’s vision (discussed below) in the worldwide dissemination of the Rebbe’s

teachings, show that the neutralisation of the messianism in early Hasidism was

inevitably only provisional and relative? Does an element of ‘neutralization’ actually

still persist within Chabad, in the contrast which we noted earlier between the

Rebbe’s esoteric doctrine and his public pronouncements? Is it the case that to his

inner circle his messianic persona was revealed, but this messianic persona was

carefully ‘neutralized’ in public, or much less overtly affirmed

Clearly a major issue to be addressed is whether, as he himself and his

followers claimed, the late Lubavitcher Rebbe, Rabbi Menachem Mendel

Schneerson, and his teachings can be seen as an authentic development of earlier

Hasidism, and indeed are rooted in the teachings of the Besht himself. If Lubavitch

messianism is a ‘pure’ expression of Hasidism, which builds on ideas intrinsic to

Hasidic tradition, if its messianic orientation is not due to external influences, but can

be seen as the expression of an authentic Hasidic ideology, then Scholem’s views are

surely called into question. Who is reading the Besht aright, Scholem or the Rebbe?

If, on the other hand, Rabbi Schneerson invented the phenomenon of ‘Lubavitch

messianism’, and historical Hasidism’s religious philosophy has very little room for

messianic claims, then Lubavitch messianism does not challenge Scholem’s

hypothesis. The potential ethical implications of the second of these alternatives

should not be shirked. Did the Rebbe act in bad faith? Was it only because of his

330 Scholem. The Messianic Idea, p. 176.

179megalomaniacal tendencies, his own messianic desires and delusions of grandeur,

that this obscure Hasidic group was pushed towards an overt and unseemly outburst

of messianic fervour? Did Menachem Mendel manipulate his tradition as a vehicle

for expressing his own very dubious messianic claims, which were, paradoxically,

largely based on his secular experiences while at university, and which, therefore,

represent nothing short of an alien incursion into Hasidic tradition? Historically there

is a gulf of some three hundred years, and at least ten different Lubavitch leaders,

between the founding of Hasidism and the present day, and outside of the Lubavitch

movement there have been hundreds of Hasidic Rebbes and Zaddikim who could

claim as good a pedigree and authority as the Rebbe. What happens if we try to tie

together the two distinct historical ends of the Hasidic movement — its Beshtian

origins in the 17th century and Lubavitch messianism in the late 20th? These are

difficult questions which raise profound problems of epistemology and historical

method, but they must be addressed.

The first point to make is that within the Lubavitch movement itself, let alone

within the broader Hasidic tradition, there have, in fact, been from time to time

upsurges of messianism. This phenomenon has not received the attention it deserves,

but it suggests that the recent upsurge may actually be part of a larger historical

pattern. I shall note later some other concrete examples of messianism within

Hasidism, but an interesting manifestation of a messianic undercurrent within Habad

is to be found in connection with the publication of Rabbi Schneur Zalman’s331 work

Likkutei Torah332 which appeared in (1848 -5608), a year when it had been

confidently predicted the Messiah would come. This date having passed without the

Messiah arriving, the faithful were told333 that in a spiritual sense the Messiah was

already here, because the printing of the Likkutei Torah was a foretaste of his

teachings.334 What this incident suggests is that there were times when a real desire

and anxious expectation for the Messiah rose to the surface within the Hasidic

movement, and that Hasidic philosophy was understood to be intrinsically messianic

(a point touched on in earlier chapters). There is evidence to suggest that there was a

major upsurge of messianic expectation also in the lifetime of the Tzemach Tzedek

331 See, Hillel Levine’s article ‘Should Napoleon Be Victorious –Politics and Spirituality in Early Modern Jewish Messianism’ Jerusalem Studies in Jewish Thought, 16-17, 2001. 332 Scheur, Zalman of Liady. Sefer Likkutei Torah. New York: Kehot Publication Society (1987). 333 By the Tzemach Tzedek, Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson (1789-1866). 334 Likkutei Sichos Volume 6, p.70 and Sefer Hisvadiyos Sicha Shabbos Bereshis 5746.

180(Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson 1789-1866), the third Lubavitcher Rebbe,

who was considered to be the potential messiah of his generation by his disciples.

His title ‘Tzemach Tzedek’, is derived from Jeremiah 23:5, ‘… I will raise up to

David a righteous offshoot [Tzemach Tzadik] …’ This title reflects the messianic

hopes that he had for himself and that were pinned on him. More recently the

Previous Rebbe (Rabbi Yosef Yitzchak Schneerson 1880-1950) claimed,

‘Immediately to repentance, immediately to redemption!’ This long history of

messianism within the Lubavitch movement, which neither Scholem335 nor Buber nor

even Idel336 mentions more than tangentially, together with further examples of the

phenomenon within the broader movement (which Scholem does acknowledge: see

below), at least raises the possibility that messianism is an integral part of Hasidic

consciousness.

The seeds of the Lubavitch messianic revival can be found in the teachings

and legends of the Baal Shem Tov himself, particularly in the famous messianic

letter sent to his brother-in-law Rabbi Gershon of Kitov which describes events that

took place on Rosh Ha-Shanah 5507 (1746). We need to remind ourselves of this

letter once again (see above chapter 5). On the face of it, as Scholem himself

stressed, the letter does not deny messianism, but seems to postpone it to a distant

future, when knowledge of the Besht’s teachings will have spread throughout the

world. From a Lubavitch perspective, arguably, that day has come, and so the

reappearance of the Messiah is inevitable. The letter lays down a condition, which, at

the time of its writing would, on one reading, seems capable of fulfilment only after a

long lapse of time; “…when your teachings will become public and revealed in the

world, and your wellsprings burst forth to the farthest extremes”. We must be

careful, however, not to foist our understanding on the text, nor simply identify our

335 Scholem and Buber were probably made aware of the philosphical nature of Chabad Hasidism before the World War II by Eric Fromm who was at the time a student of Reb Zalman B. Rabincov. See: Löwy, Michael. ‘Religious Jews Tending to Anarchism: Martin Buber, Franz Rosenzweig, Gershom Scholem, Leo Lowenthal.’ In Redemption and Utopia, Jewish Libertarian Thought in Central Europe: A Study in Elective Affinity. Trans. Hope Heaney, pp. 47-70; also see Brumlick, Micha. Messianic Thinking in the Jewish Intelligentia of the Twenties at a congress on Humanism and Society which took place to commemorate Erich Fromm’s 90th birthday on March, 23/24th 1990, in Heidelberg, Germany. Also, Pejša, Stanislav Guide to the Papers of Franz Rosenzweig (1886-1929), 1832-1999. Leo Baeck Institute website: http://www.cjh.org/academic/findingaids/lbi/nhprc/FranzRosenzweigf.html (9th January 06) Jung, Leo Sages and Saints The Jewish Lubrary Volume 10. New Jersy: Ktav Publishing (1987) p.99-105, Goldmann, Nahum. The Autobiography of Nahum Goldmann. Sixty Year of Jewish Life. Trans Helen Sebba. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, pp. 45-47 336 Idel, Messianic Mystics p. 247.

181expectations with the expectations of the Hasidic reader. The prediction is not

exact, and religious hermeneutics, and the religious imagination, are well able to see

it fulfilled in a variety of ways. But given the worldwide reach of Hasidism in

general, and of Habad in particular, it is surely not straining the imagination to claim

that by the late 20th century the condition had been fulfilled, and so to see the

upsurge of messianism as rooted in this early teaching.

The crucial text runs as follows, in the first version which Scholem supplies.

This is purportedly ‘in his [the Besht’s] own handwriting and preserved by one of the

grandchildren of Rabbi Israel of Rizhin’.337

Version 1 ‘I went up stage after stage until I entered the palace of the Messiah where Messiah studies Torah with all the Tannaim and the Zaddikim, and became aware of a very great rejoicing, of which I did not know the meaning, and I thought that it might be because of my decease from the world in this ecstasy. But later it was intimated to me that I was not yet to die, for they in heaven enjoy it when I perform acts of yichud on earth by meditating on their teachings. But the true nature of this rejoicing I do not know to this very day. And I asked the Messiah when he would come, and he answered: Not until your teachings will spread throughout the world.’338

The second version contains the slightly fuller account published by Rabbi Jacob

Joseph of Polnoye in 1781, which Scholem prefers:

Version 2 ‘By this you shall know it: when your doctrine (this way of teaching) will be widely known and revealed throughout the world, and what I taught you will be divulged outwards from our own resources. And they too will be able to perform acts of meditative unification and ascent like you. And then all the husks will perish, and the time of salvation will have come. And I was bewildered because of this answer, and I was greatly aggrieved by the enormous length of time until this would be possible.’339

We need to examine this closely. When the Besht says in version 1, ‘I went up stage

after stage until I entered the palace of the Messiah’, he is obviously following a

style of meditation and heavenly ascent associated with the traditional Merkava

337 Mikhtavin MehaBesht (Lvov, 1923) pp. 1-5. 338 Scholem, The Messianic Idea, p. 182. 339 Scholem, The Messianic Idea, p. 183.

182mystics,340 but what are we to understand by this? The nature of the Merkava

‘ascent’ is highly ambiguous: it is an ‘ascent’ (aliya) which is at the same time

somehow a descent (yerida). There is a possible way to understand this paradox,

which is to take it as describing the process the mystic undertakes in order to go up to

the heavenly realm, namely by going deep ‘down’ within himself in order to go up

out of this world.341 The Baal Shem, therefore, actually descends into the innermost

depths of his ‘cosmic’ psyche: ‘the palace of the Messiah’ represents both a cosmic

and heavenly ‘reality’, and the inner ‘messianic potential’ within the Besht himself.

This psychological interpretation, while not denying the ‘reality’ of the heavenly

realm, opens up the possibility of seeing that realm as existing within the Baal

Shem’s creative psyche.

We should remind ourselves of the dramatic setting of this scene is being

played out in the Baal Shem Tov’s own mind! So when he says ‘where Messiah

studies Torah with all the Tannaim and the Zaddikim’, he is, in a sense, all the

characters in this play: he is the Messiah, the Tannaim, and the Zaddikim. The

Messiah’s teachings were at the same time those of the Baal Shem Tov. In the

Besht’s vision the Messiah is someone who teaches both the Talmudists and

Zaddikim. 342 Notably he has something to teach to both, something that both need

to understand.

‘And I became aware of a very great rejoicing of which I did not know the

meaning’. It is unclear how far the Besht’s ignorance is to be taken at face value.

This motif of ‘not knowing’ in a dream or vision is found elsewhere, for example,

according to Rashi, when Moses was asked for the reason why Jews were not

allowed to marry gentile Midianites, he is said to have replied that he ‘did not know’

or that he ‘had forgotten the teaching’.343 It is understood that he forgot because he

himself was personally caught up in the issue, as he had married a Midianite woman,

340 Kaplan, Aryeh. Meditation and Kabbalah. Maine: Samuel Weiser (1985). pp.19, 41-2, 78, 136 and 164; Idel, Moshe. ‘Hasidism: Mystical Messianism’ in Messianic Mystics, pp. 212-247. Also ‘Mystical Redemption and Sabbateanism and Mysticism’, in Messianic Mystics. pp. 202-3. 341 Wolfson, Elliot, ‘Yeridah la-Merkavah: Typology of Ecstasy and Enthronement in Ancient Jewish Mysticism’, Mystics of the Book: Themes, Topics and Typologies, ed. R. A. Herrera, New York (1993), pp. 13-44. 342 Following a long tradition of Rabbinic messianism, the Messiah is conceived here not as a politician, nor as a king, but primarily as a teacher of Torah, a point to which we shall return. See: Isaiah 11: 2, Midrash Rabbah Genesis, 901, Midrash Rabbah Genesis 1:6, 98:9, Soncino Zohar, Bereshith, Section 1, p. 4b, 343 Rashi on Numbers 23:6.

183and therefore ‘did not know’.344 The Baal Shem, who would have been familiar

with this notion, plays with it, whether consciously or unconsciously. The ‘very great

rejoicing’ could be the tremendous joy that is felt both in ‘heaven’ and within

himself that he had arrived at ‘the palace of the Messiah.’ It is, so to speak, a cosmic

‘pat on the back’ and a confirmation that he was not only able to be in the Messianic

palace, but had attained the level of the messianic consciousness within himself.

What could be a higher achievement in one’s spiritual life than this glorious

attainment? He therefore thought that his life had come to its ultimate completion

and conclusion,; however, it was not to be, as the next part explains:

And I thought that it might be because of my decease from the world (in this ecstasy). But later it was intimated to me that I was not yet to die, for they in heaven enjoy it when I perform acts of yichud on earth by meditating on their teachings.

Meditating on the teachings of the Sages in the earthly realm was considered more

joyous and important than the ecstatic leaving of the world. In this vision and

meditation, the sages communicate this information to him. Moreover, as the Baal

Shem is in some sense all of the characters within this scene, he also the character of

the Messiah and the barer of the messianic teachings. Therefore, in the next verse

when he speaks to the Messiah, ‘And I asked the Messiah’, one possible reading, is

that he is approaching the Messiah within himself, ‘when will he come’, i.e., when

will the Baal Shem Tov’s own personal messianic potential be revealed to the entire

world, on a historical level, because it is clear to him that it was already known on

the spiritual level.

‘And he answered: Not until your teachings will spread throughout the

world,’ clearly connecting the revelation of the Baal Shem Tov’s teachings with the

coming of the Messiah, and according to my reading, with the Besht’s own messianic

aspirations. This message from the soul of the Messiah to the Baal Shem, authorizes

and empowers the dissemination of the Besht’s teachings to as many as possible, not

just as a proselytising carrier of a new religious message but as an active and positive

vehicle for the bringing of the Messiah and the messianic era. The second version

makes all of this much clearer and takes this idea one step further. The spread of the

Besht’s teachings will enable his followers to achieve what he achieved, to perform

344 Talmud Bava Kama 90b, ‘Ain ed nasse dayyan’.

184acts of yichud and make the ascent to heaven to the palace of the Messiah, and,

like Abulafia, he shows them the way to redeem themselves, to become their own

messiahs. When this happens, ‘then all the husks will perish and the time of salvation

will have come.’

‘And I was aggrieved about the amount of time that this would take.’ This is

the nub of Scholem’s case: the coming of the Messiah is indefinitely postponed, and

therefore messianism is ‘neutralized’.345 Whether or not this is a proper

understanding of the text (a question to which we shall turn in a moment), the

statement unquestionably binds Hasidism and messianism together and makes the

teachings of the Baal Shem intrinsically messianic in meaning. Scholem insists that

the postponement of the Messiah’s coming ‘saddens and depresses’ the Baal Shem.

However, his understanding of the psychological situation envisaged here is not as

self-evident as he seems to suppose. ‘I was greatly aggrieved’ does not necessarily

indicate melancholy, sadness and resignation. The emotions might actually be much

more positive and motivate the Besht to do something to spread his teachings and

change the world. After all he has just been informed not only that the dissemination

of those teachings will help to bring the messianic era, but also that they are in

themselves redemptive.

Scholem’s claim that ‘the exact connection between the nature of [the

Bersht’s] teaching and the future redemption remains unexplained and undefined,’346

is clearly open to challenge. Two statements in the dialogue between the soul of the

Messiah and the Baal Shem Tov are important for our discussion: The first is that the

Messiah will not come ‘until your [the Besht’s] teachings will spread throughout the

world,’ or, as the second version puts it, until ‘your doctrine (this way of teaching)

will be widely known and revealed throughout the world…’. And the second is that

when people perform yichudim like the Besht, they too will be able to make the

ascent to the palace of the Messiah. It is through an acceptance of the teachings of

the Baal Shem and through imitation of him that they too will achieve redemption.

As explained above, the Baal Shem had already reached the ‘level’ of the Messiah

within himself, and so was experiencing personal redemption. This is not

uncommonly claimed for some Hasidic leaders, who are said to be already living in

345 Scholem, The Messianic Idea, p. 183. 346 Scholem, The Messianic Idea, p. 183.

185the messianic era (again, more on this realised eschatology below). But he was

also asking about his own messianic potential. When would this internal realisation,

this personal redemption, become manifest to the world on an ‘historical’ level? The

answer, to paraphrase, was, ‘When his teachings have become worldwide, and

people understand what he is teaching, and themselves are experiencing a similar

type of personal redemption, which realistically may take time.’ He therefore sees

himself, his teachings, and subsequently his movement, as being key factors in the

actualisation of the historical and universal redemption, and it is the actual and real

redemption, which he looks forward to and ultimately anticipates. I would argue that

it is therefore the sole goal of his life and is at the heart of all of his religious

teachings. Only when his religious philosophy has become mainstream will it

become manifest that he is the Messiah, and only when others experience personal

redemption will the messianic era have materialized.

As to the precise and internal link, for which Scholem asks, between the

teachings of the Besht and the redemption, this is bound up with the central and

closely related Hasidic concepts of yichud and devakut. What I would argue is that

the Baal Shem was actually envisaging inaugurating a campaign of personal

redemption en masse. The spread of his teachings would bring about the actual

redemption. His revelation is the catalyst of the redemption, and thus he performs the

role of the Messiah. But this redemption cannot, as in the Maimonidean scenario, be

imposed from above, by a warrior king. Each individual has a role to play in bringing

about the messianic era, each ascending to the celestial palace of the Messiah.

Though he might have felt that a great spiritual hero like himself could have ‘forced’

the messianic redemption through his own service of yichudim, his actual vision is of

empowering each individual via his teaching to work out his or her own salvation.

There is good Kabbalistic precedent for this in the Kabbalistic idea that the

relationship between God and the Jewish people is one of a partnership, which

requires equal desire and commitment from both parties to mend the world.347 Only

when redemption is something that is the desire of the Jewish people and initiated by

them, will God bring it about, because only then is it a real and thorough redemption,

a revolution from the grass roots.

347 ‘Isrusa Deletta and Isrusa Delela’ –See the fourth book of Tanya- Igeres HaKodesh Chapters 5, 6, 12, 17, 21 and 32 also Kuntres HaAchron Chapter 5.

186This is why the practice of yichudim and the experience of devekut are so

pivotal to the Baal Shem’s messianic campaign. The yichudim are intrinsically

messianic; it is through the process of each and every individual ‘doing’ yichudim

that the messianic era will be achieved. Scholem seriously underestimates the

messianic significance of the yichudim, dismissing them as ‘magical practises…and

ecstatic trips to heaven which …are…very marginal…’348 I would propose that

rather than seeing them as a peculiar set of Kabbalistic incantations, they might

better be understood, in the common Hasidic way, as daily meditations and

experiences of union with God or devekut. The word yichud, or ‘unification’ lends

itself quite easily to this interpretation. Thus yichudim are best described as

‘meditative practices of unification’, where any number of thoughts, sayings or

actions provide the opportunity to unite, and experience the underlying unity of the

world and union with the divine.

The new emphasis within the teaching of the Besht on a ritualized practice of

devekut349 is also intended, I would argue against Scholem, to be messianic and

redemptive, and in teaching the way of achieving devekut the Baal Shem Tov and

subsequent Hasidic leaders are acting as redemptive, messianic figures. Devekut, can

best be described as an experience of union with God. Sometimes this union involves

a loss of individual selfhood in an overwhelming experience of the unity of God and

of all existence, at others it involves an experience of ‘grace’ (hesed) in one’s

everyday life, or a sense of ‘divine providence’ (hasgocha protis). Scholem, Buber

and others have disputed whether this devekut is world-affirming or world-denying.

There can be no doubt that many of the ideas about devekut transmitted in the name

of the Baal Shem and subsequent Hasidic Masters seem to encourage escape from

the world. Comments on the limitations of the physical world, of the physical body

and of the ego, are not hard to find in the early Hasidic writings. However, one

should not forget the overall sociological and theological context in which these are

made, namely, within an aggressively antagonistic opposition to early Hasidism and

the very gnostically influenced Kabbalistic tradition, which the Hasidic movement

inherited and in part embraced. Therefore, within the context of the situatedness of

both inherited ideologies and religious and political opposition the attitude towards

348 Scholem, The Messianic Idea, p. 183. 349 Elior, Rachel, ‘R. Joseph Karo and R. Israel Ba'al Shem Tov - Mystical Metamorphosis, Kabbalistic Inspiraton and Spiritual Internalization’ (Hebrew), Tarbiz, 65/4 (1996), pp. 671-709.

187materiality is generally positive. Devekut is a complex concept, the nuances of

which are not easily caught by positing a sharp polarity between world-affirming and

world-denying. Devekut is not meant to be an end in itself, but rather a prerequisite

for proper ‘being in this world’. The continuous oscillation between world and non-

world creates a unique dynamic which allows one both to serve God and to

experience the world with joy. Scholem insists that devekut is

…without eschatological connotations, i.e., it can be realized in this life, in a direct and personal way, by every individual, and has no Messianic meaning.’ It is a state of personal bliss which can be attained without having recourse to the vast field of eschatology, utopianism, and Messianism. Being a strictly individual attainment, it is not an experience of the group, the social community of men, as is messianic redemption, nor is it rooted in a hope or, for that matter, an anticipation of the Hereafter, of the World-to-Come. In an eschatological sense, man cannot be redeemed alone, individually. Such individual redemption or salvation carries in Judaism no Messianic meaning. It is essentially a private experience; devekut can be reached alone.350

Scholem’s definition of messianism becomes rather clear here. For him messianic

redemption relates only to the eschaton and involves only the group. By definition

the experience of individual redemption here and now cannot, therefore, be

messianic. But as Yehuda Liebes,351 Moshe Idel and others have made clear, this is a

highly restrictive definition of messianism, which Scholem nowhere justifies, and

which fails to do justice to the actual subtlety of the concept in Jewish thought.352 It

leaves out the possibility of realised eschatology and realised messianism. Abraham

Abulafia, the Baal Shem Tov and the Rebbe, all, though not denying an

eschatological redemption, certainly hold that the final redemption is also realized in

this world in a direct and personal way, and this individual experience is a necessary

precursor of the final redemption of the world. There are traditional antecedents for

mystical and personal redemption within classic Kabbalistic works such as the

Zohar, 353 and yet Scholem ignores them.

350 Scholem. The Messianic Idea, p. 204. 351 Liebes, Y. On Sabbateanism and Its Kabbalah: Collected Essays, (Hebrew) Jerusalem (1995) pp. 10-18. 352 Idel, Moshe. Messianic Mystics, New Haven and London. Yale University Press (1998), pp. 1-37 and the Chapter on Hasidism: ‘Mystical Messianic and Mystical Redemption’ pp. 213ff. 353 The Zohar which is perhaps one source for such mystical and non-historical redemptions, conceptually joins the oneness of God, the Jewish people and the coming of the messianic era, together. It states, ‘As God is One, so is Israel one, as it says: “And who is like your people, one people on earth?” (2 Sam. Vll, 23). And as His name is one…’ This mention of ‘His name is one’ comes from Zechariah 14:9, ‘On that day the Lord will be one and His name one’, which both the Zohar and Talmud connect to the messianic era. See, Zohar Terumah 135a-b, Soncino Zohar,

188

Within Hasidism the practice of yichudim particularly the uniting of

combinations of God’s names coupled with the experience devekut are an

anticipation of the eschatological fulfilment of the verse from Zechariah 14:9, ‘On

that day the Lord will be one and His name one’, which both the Talmud and Zohar

understand to have messianic significance. Thus mystical experiences of union and

unity will, if filtered through the influence of the Zohar,354 inevitably be seen in a

Jewish theological context as bound up with the messianic hope, and as foretastes of

the messianic redemption.

Interestingly, Scholem himself acknowledges that devekut can be experienced

at a communal level, and thus one of his criteria for denying its messianic character

(viz., that it is individualistic) can be called into question. He writes:

The only exception, when devekut became an experience of the whole community of Israel, was — at least according to some Jewish theologians — the revelation at Mount Sinai, but even then it was more in the nature of a multiplied experience of many single individuals than of the community as an integrated whole.355

For a number of reasons this is not persuasive. The distinction between the

‘multiplied experience of many single individuals’ and the experience of ‘the

community as an integrated whole’ is surely forced. The fact is that although the

Midrash recognizes something like this distinction in connection with the crossing of

the Red Sea,356 as far as Sinai is concerned it asserts in a variety ways that Israel

experienced the events there ‘like one man with one heart…’.357 And Sinai can

hardly be taken as a unique event in this context, given that Kabbalistic and Hasidic

Bereshis, Section 1, pp. 29a, 34a, 76b, Shemos, Section 2, p. 134a, Vayikra, Section 3, pp. 7b, 77b, 260b, Talmud Pesachim 50a. See, Idel, ‘Messianism and Devekut’ in Messianic Mystics, p. 281. 354 Soncino Zohar, Shemos, Section 2, p. 16b. 355 Scholem. The Messianic Idea p. 204. 356 Rashi on Parsha Beshalach, Exodus 15:2. Talmud Sotah 11b. Mechilta Beshalach, Massechet

Shira, chapter. 3. ‘Rabbi Eliezer says, “How do we know that a maidservant at the sea beheld that

which even the prophets—including Isaiah and Ezekiel—never saw? As it is said: ‘When I spoke to the prophets, I granted many visions, and spoke parables through the prophets’ (Hos.12:1). And it is written: ‘The heavens opened and I saw visions of God’ (Ezek.1:1)...When the Holy One revealed Himself at the Sea...as soon as they saw Him they recognized Him and all opened their mouths and proclaimed: ‘This is my God’ (Ex.15:2)”. Also Midrash Tehillim 69, Rabbi A. Kook, Olat Re’iya, vol. II, p. 438. However, “the Kotzker Rebbe [explained], but the day after the miracle at the sea, the serving -girl still remained a servant and Ezekiel was still a prophet.” Rabbi Sholom Riskin http://www.ohrtorahstone.org.il/parsha/5761/yitro61.htm (9th Jan 2006). 357 Rashi on Exodus 19:2. Also Talmud Megillah 14a. and the Mechilta Beshalach.

189sources draw parallels between the revelation at Mount Sinai and the revelation

of God in the messianic age.358 If Israel at Sinai adhered to God in an act of

communal devekut, they will adhere to God in the same way in the messianic age,

and the individual acts of adherence and union now anticipate that eschatological

devekut. The union of heaven and earth experienced at Sinai, when, as the Midrash

explains, ‘the ban precluding the mixing of heaven and earth was lifted; above

descended to below and below rose to above’, will be replicated at the eschaton.359

The interconnectedness of the Baal Shem’s life and mission, and his drive to

promote himself and his teachings as the vehicle of the messianic redemption, is

surely clear evidence that Beshtian Hasidism qualifies by its very nature as

messianic. This is not to deny that there are basic differences between Hasidism and

Sabbatianism. At first glance Hasidism does indeed look less messianic in character

than Sabbatianism, but it would surely be wrong to deduce from this fact alone that

messianism was not pivotal to early Hasidism, as if Sabbatianism were the paradigm

of Jewish messianism. Scholem himself stresses the links between Sabbatianism and

Hasidism,360 and indeed both movements could be classified broadly as belonging to

the same religious type. But, of course, Hasidism lacks a pivotal messianic figure

comparable to Shabbetai Zvi. In his place stands the Zaddik, or rather a series of

Zaddikim. It is part of Scholem’s case for the neutralisation of messianism in

Hasidism that the concept of the Zaddik diffuses the messianic persona across a

series of individual figures. Instead of a single Messiah, there is a number of ‘mini-

messiahs.’ This is, unquestionably a distinctive feature of Hasidic messianism, but it

does not mean that Hasidism rejects any concept of the Messiah, or that it is

intrinsically any less messianic than Sabbatianism.

Early Hasidism’s lack of openness about its messianic aspirations could be

explained by the circumstances of the times. The birth of the movement was fraught

with difficulties, and the Baal Shem himself found much opposition to his mystical

358 Tanya, Likkutei Amarim. chapter 36. 359 Midrash Shemos Rabbah 12:3 and Midrash Tanchuma Vayera 15; see also Likkutei Sichos Volume 8, pp. 21-28. 360 Scholem. ‘The Neutralization of the Messianic Element in Early Hasidism’ in The Messianic Idea, p.176-202, and ‘Hasidism: The Latest Phase’ in Major Trends. pp. 325-350. Also see, Moshe Idel’s Introduction to Hasidism p. 4.

190teachings, and, as some feared, to his messianic pretensions.361 The Besht’s

frustration over this may well be reflected in the statement in his letter about the

length of time it was going to take for his teachings to be acknowledged, and,

consequently for the messianic age to come. The conflict it engendered, as well as

the recent scandals surrounding Shabbetai Zvi’s messianic claims, could have shaped

the way Hasidism portrayed itself to the outside world. This raises the question of

whether there might have been a tension between the public presentation of its

teachings and its ‘real’ beliefs, which would only have been fully known, or clearly

expressed, to an inner circle. If there was a suppression of the messianism in

Hasidism, this might only have taken place in the more public sphere, whereas, in

reality, messianism continued to be the pivotally important axis round which the

movement revolved. If we accept this proposal, then Scholem could be both right and

wrong, right in that messianism in Hasidism was, in comparison to Sabbatianism,

‘neutralised’, and wrong in that, for public relations reasons, it just went

underground.

The theme of a tension between an outward and inward facing doctrine runs

throughout Hasidic history. We have already noted how it applies to the case of the

Rebbe. From its very conception Hasidism has had to play, so to speak, a public

relations game. Its birth was surrounded by turmoil and opposition. It had to define

itself within a Jewish world that was at times deeply hostile. There were different

approaches within the early Hasidic movement to this opposition.362 Some argued

that the Hasidim should take no notice of it, and deliberately make ‘holy fools’ of

themselves. But the Alter Rebbe, Rabbi Schneur Zalman, wrote to one of his

contemporaries, Rav Abraham of Kalisk in 1810 advising him and his followers not

361 Idel, Moshe. Hasidism, Between Ecstasy and Magic. New York: State University of New York Press, Albany. (1995). p. 80. Scholem. The Neutralization of the Messianic Element in Early Hasidism’ in The Messianic Idea, pp. 176-202.

362 Wilensky, Mordecai L. ‘Hasidic-Mitnaggedic Polemics in the Jewish Communities of Eastern Europe: The Hostile Phase’, in Hundert, G.D. (ed), Essential Papers on Hasidism (1991). Teller, Adam (ed.) Scripta Hierosolymitana 38: Studies in the History of the Jews in Old Poland in Honor of Jacob Goldberg. Jerusalem: Magnes Press, (1998). Schochet, E. J. The Hasidic Movement and the Gaon of Vilna. Northvale, New Jersey: Jason Aronson, (1994). Hasdai, Yaacov ‘The Origins of the Conflict Between Hasidim and Mitnagdim’ in Safran, B. (ed) Hasidism — Continuity or Innovation. (1988). Dubnow, Simon ‘The Beginnings: The Baal Shem Tov (Besht) and the Center in Podolia’, in Hundert, G.D. (ed) Essential Papers on Hasidism (1991). Nadler, Allan The Faith of the Mithnagdim: Responses to Hasidic Rupture. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, (1997).

191to take this path.363 Schneur Zalman, a talented Talmudist and halachist, was

originally of Lithuanian descent, the traditional home of the opponents of Hasidism,

and was, therefore, a welcome recruit to the ranks of the Hasidim. He formulated

Hasidic philosophy in his book the Tanya, in which he continued a tradition, begun

by the Maggid, of mixing Lithuanian Musar with Hasidism.364 Nevertheless, his life

and teachings contain potential messianic nuances, the most striking of which was

his arrangement of his household/school in manner representing the Temple, with

himself occupying the position of the Holy of Holies.365

There is a further consideration which might support the idea that messianism

within early Hasidism simply went underground. Scholem himself acknowledges

that there have indeed been strong messianic tendencies within Hasidism. He speaks

of the

…resurgence of Messianic claims or impulses in connection with some outstanding Hasidic leaders, such as Jacob Yitzhak Horovitz, the ‘Seer of Lublin’, his pupils Jacob Yitzhak, the ‘saintly Jew’ of Pshizha, and David of Lelov, and overshadowing them all, the figure of Nachman of Bratzlav, the great-grandson of Israel Baal Shem, whose life was undoubtedly pervaded by a sense of Messianic vocation and whose teaching is strongly imbued with Messianic elements, even though much of it is expressed in a veiled and roundabout manner.366

In other words, he seems to admit that the ‘neutralisation’ of messianism within

Hasidism affected at most only the first fifty years or so of its existence, the first two

or three generations (the generations of the Besht, the Maggid and maybe Rabbi

Schneur Zalman). But this naturally raises the question: if this neutralisation did

occur, why was it so short-lived? One possible answer would be that in its uncertain

early days, when it came under ferocious attack from the Misnagdim, it was prudent

to present itself to the bastions of Orthodoxy as less messianic than it really was.

Once it was established it could be more open about its beliefs. Scholem himself

363 Schneersohn, Yosef Yitzchak, The Making of Chassidim. New York: Sichos in English (1996) Chapter 1. 364 Dubnow, Simon ‘The Maggid of Miedzyrzecz, His Associates, and the Center in Volhynia (1760-1772)’ in Hundert, G.D. (ed) Essential Papers on Hasidism (1991). Buber, Martin. Tales of the Hasidim- The Early Masters. Trans. Olga Marx.New York: Martin Press. (1947). Schocet, Jacob Immanuel. Tzava’at Harivash, The Testament of Rabbi Israel Baal Shem Tov. New York: Kehot Publication Society. (1998). 365 HaTomim Volume 2 Warsaw, (1935), p. 126. ‘From the day that the Temple and the Holy of Holies was destroyed, until Hashem, May He Be Blessed, has mercy and sends us the righteous redeemer… and builds Jerusalem for us and the Temple with the Holy of Holies; behold, Lubavitch is our Jerusalem and the House of prayer that His Holiness The Rebbe prays in our Temple…’. 366 Scholem.The Messianic Idea, p. 179.

192recognizes this tendency to dissemble in early Hasidism. He speaks of

Hasidism’s debt to Sabbatianism as being ‘hidden and unacknowledged’.367 But it

was precisely that Sabbatian element that was messianic in character. Scholem also

speaks of Reb Nachman’s messianism as having been ‘expressed in a veiled and

roundabout manner’. If even in Reb Nachman’s time concealment of messianic

aspirations was felt to be necessary, then such dissembling might well be seen as

intrinsic to the character of the earlier forms of Hasidism.

In reply to Tishby,368 who criticized Scholem’s theory of the neutralisation of

messianism, Scholem quotes Rabbi Elimelekh of Lizensk (1786) 369 to prove that

there was a tradition in early Hasidism which forbade the bringing of the Messiah.

But there is another way of reading Elimelekh, and when put within the context of

the nature of devekut and the role of the Zaddik, his teaching can take on a different

meaning. As I indicated earlier, within the relationship between God and the Jewish

people, there are two main ways in which the redemption can be brought about, viz.,

from above and from below. The redemption of the divine sparks, as demanded by

Lurianic Kabbalah, can be achieved either from above by lifting them up, that is, by

nullifying the ‘husks’ through exposure to a transcendent divine light (iskafyah), or

from below, by going down and ‘sweetening’ them where they reside, and redeeming

them in the place where they are, by the transformation of darkness itself into light

(ishap’cha). This redemption, or battle for the soul of the divine that is trapped

within the object, can be approached either in the manner of Sovev, transcending, or

in the manner of Memalay, filling, i.e., at close quarters. An individual Zaddik might

well be able to descend into the klippos and redeem them at their source, thus

bringing about the actual redemption. To achieve purification from below to above,

the Zaddik might argue that all that is needed, is that he ‘sweeten’ these klippos, and

thus redeem the world. As Scholem puts it:

The Zaddik has the power to annihilate the forces of severity and rigor by getting down to their root and “sweetening” them at their original place. … He faces the dark powers at their root and transforms them by meditating on the element of holiness which is inherent even in them. …If all the dinim, these powers of rigor, are sweetened, then redemption would come. But the Rabbi of Lizensk warns the Zaddik who wishes to embark on this enterprise of

367 Scholem, The Messianic Idea, p. 184. 368 Tishby, Isaiah. Zion. 32 (1967), pp.1-45 369 Scholem.The Messianic Idea, p. 184.

193“sweetening” that “he should not exert himself to annihilate the unclean power altogether, because by this he would cause the immediate coming of the Messiah.” In other words: Messianic exertion is forbidden.370

But the point that Scholem misses here is that Rabbi Elimelech’s statement should be

read against the Baal Shem’s claim that the redemption should only be brought about

by every single Jew performing yichudim and devekut: it should be achieved from the

bottom up, through the service of each individual, and not from the top down,

through a heroic individual act. When Rabbi Elimelekh warns the Zaddik not to

bring about the redemption by descending to ‘sweeten’ the husks, what he is saying

is that the redemption must not be imposed on the world by the action of a single

Zaddik. The world must itself come to feel the need for redemption. There is a

danger of bringing the Messiah, without, paradoxically, bringing in the messianic era

itself.

Hasidism from the outset was a strongly proselytising movement, and, given

the early hostility which it provoked, it is hardly surprising that at times it

accommodated its language to its audience. This can be seen in the way in which

central teachings, such as the doctrine of devekut (about which we have already said

something above), were publicly presented. Newcomers to Hasidism from more

traditional Jewish backgrounds at first find the concept of devekut quite alien. One

way round this was to express it in language borrowed from Musar. Extensive use of

Musar softened the strangeness of the idea of devekut and helped to disseminate it.

This use of Musar began with the Maggid, who was the perfect candidate to inherit

the leadership of the movement, and whose extensive familiarity with Musar helped

protect the fledgling movement against the more vocal attacks from mainstream

Judaism. His approach, as we noted earlier, was carried on by Nachman of Bratzlav.

The use of Musar language and metaphors, and even of Musar theology was a means

to an end, rather than an end in itself. It provided a vehicle of expression that was

more familiar to the orthodox ear. Seen this way, the emphasis in Hasidic preaching

on the more ascetic, self-denying aspects of the movement’s philosophy could be

construed as an accommodation to the dominant cultural values. This ongoing

conflict between those values and the values of the movement created something of a

dichotomy between the outward, public message of Hasidism and its inner, core

teachings — a dichotomy that has persisted down to the present day. Devekut was for

370 Scholem. The Messianic Idea, p. 193.

194most people difficult to grasp, because it was not just an intellectual concept, but

a meditative experience.371 Simple techniques were advised to help the ‘freshman’

familiarise himself with both the idea itself and its meditative implementation.372 But

this advice to the Hasidic novice should not be confused with the deeper teaching,

the real message, which the novice at this point may not be able to grasp without

misinterpreting it, a misinterpretation that could lead to all sorts of halachic

anomalies that the movement has always been keen to avoid.

From the perspective of this polarity between an inner and an outer doctrine,

it might be advisable to reassess Hasidism by ignoring its outer accommodations to

its historical and cultural context. This would mean that we should, for example,

effectively discount or ignore Hasidism’s traditional, Musar-based expressions of its

theology and ideology and instead focus on its innovative inner teachings. If we do

this, much of Scholem’s analysis of the nature of Hasidic devekut can be seen as

beside the point. It is correct that Hasidism did borrow and use the traditional

language of older, more ascetic forms of Jewish mysticism. However, this borrowing

conceals the true, innovative character of Hasidic theology. This inner-outer

dichotomy really does pervade Hasidism, right from its origins, or even, perhaps,

from its pre-history in the possibly mythological, inner circle of élite Hasidim,373

which supposedly pre-dated the Besht. It is reflected in the stories told about the

personality of the Baal Shem, about his dissembling and concealment, and his

eventual disclosure and acceptance.374 It is also to be seen in the fact that the

simultaneous mass appeal of the movement went hand-in-hand with the development

of élitist Kabbalistic teachings intelligible really only to a small inner circle. We also

find it in the tales of Reb Nachman of Bratzlav, which can be appreciated both on a

superficial, popular level, and on deep level of Kabbalah.375

371 Scholem, The Messianic Idea,, p.204. 372 Zalman, Schneur. Likkuttei Amarim – Tanya. New York: Kehot Publication Society. (1989). Chapters, 8, 16, 31. Kohanzad, Max. Gnosticism in the Tanya. Published on www.xlubi.com Also see, Dan, J. ‘Kabbalistic and Gnostic Dualism’, Binah 3 (1994), pp. 19-33 = Da'at 19 (1987), pp. 5-16 373 Schneersohn, Rabbi Joseph I. Lubavitcher Rabbi’s Memoirs. New York: Kehot Publication Society. (1993), pp. 30-45. Also, The Hidden Mystics http://www.chabad.org/library/article.asp?AID=110432 (12th Jan 2006)

374 Etkes, Immanuel ‘The Historical Besht – Reconstruction or Destruction’, Polin 12, London: The Littman Library of Jewish Civilization, (1999). 375 Buber, Martin Shivhay HaBesht – The Legend of the Baal Shem, Trans Maurice Friedman. New York: Harper (1955). 375 Piekarz, Mendel Hasidut Braslav. Jerusalem: Mosad Bialik, (1972). Green, Arthur Tormented Master: A Life of Rabbi Nahman of Bratslav. Alabama: University of Alabama Press, (1979).

195Scholem posits that devekut is not union with God, ‘…because union with

God is denied to man even in that mystical upsurge of the soul, according to

Kabbalistic theology.’376 I would like to press my analysis of the Hasidic concept of

devekut a little further, by bringing into the discussion the Kabbalistic theological

doctrine of Tzim Tzum.377 This will help us, I would suggest, to grasp why, as I noted

earlier, Scholem supposed that devekut by its nature is negative and world-denying

and that union with God is impossible. The concept of Tzim Tzum was originally an

innovation of Lurianic Kabbalah.378 The act of divine Tzim Tzum took place before

creation, but although it occurred before the birth of the physical world, it continues

to function within the metaphysical universe.379 Before this great divine contraction,

God’s light and being pervaded the place where world now stands.380 God made a

‘space’, that is to say, he made room for the possibility of another existence, which is

the world.381 The primordial void, formed by his contraction, is the focus of the

present discussion. The two ways of understanding the process of Tzim Tzum

profoundly affect our understanding of the nature of devekut.382

Traditionally in non-Hasidic thought, Kabbalists understand Tzim Tzum to be

a real event, the actual removal of God’s light, and therefore of God’s presence, from

the place in which the world would come to be.383 This obviously has significant

376 Scholem, ‘Devekut, or Communion with God’, The Messianic Idea in Judaism, p. 201. 377 Schocet, Jacob Immanuel. Mystical Concepts in Chasidism, An Introduction to Kabbalistic Concepts and Doctrines. New York: Kehot Publication Society. (1988). Chapter 2, who cites: Etz Chayim, Mevo She’arim; Sha’ar Hahakdamost. Tanya chapters 21-22, 48-49 and Shaar HaYichud chapters 3-4, 6-7, 9-10. And Torah Or, Vayera, 13c, Likkutei Torah 2:51b. Although Dr. Alan Brill believes that TzimTzum was a conceptual invention of Maimonides and not Luria, see: Early Modern Intellectual Jewish History, with notes by Josh Yuter at http://yucs.org/~jyuter/notes/earlymodern.html (13th Jan 2006). 378 Sack, Bracha, “Rabbi Moses Cordovero's Doctrine of Tzimtzum” (Hebrew), Tarbiz 58 (1989), pp. 207-237. Sack, “Rabbi Moses Cordovero and Rabbi Isaac Luria" (Hebrew), Jerusalem Studies in Jewish Thought (The Lurianic Kabbalah) 10 (1992), pp. 311-340. Idel, Moshe. ‘On the Concept of Zimzum in Kabbalah and its Research’, Jerusalem Studies in Jewish Thought, 10 (1992), pp. 59-112 (Hebrew); B. Huss, 'Genizat Ha-Or in Simeon Lavi's Ketem Paz and the Lurianic Doctrine of Zimzum’, Jerusalem Studies in Jewish Thought 10 (1992), pp. 341-362 (Hebrew). Schocet, Jacob Immanuel. Mystical Concepts in Chasidism, An Introduction to Kabbalistic Concepts and Doctrines. New York: Kehot Publication Society. (1988). Chapter 2. Scholem, Gershom. On the Kabbalah and its Symbolism. Trans. Ralph Manheim. New York: Schcken Books. (1977). 379 Schocet, Jacob Immanuel. Mystical Concepts in Chasidism, An Introduction to Kabbalistic Concepts and Doctrines. New York: Kehot Publication Society. (1988), pp. 51-53. 380 Schocet, Jacob Immanuel. Mystical Concepts in Chasidism, An Introduction to Kabbalistic Concepts and Doctrines. New York: Kehot Publication Society. (1988). pp. 50-51. 381 Schocet, Jacob Immanuel. Mystical Concepts in Chasidism, An Introduction to Kabbalistic Concepts and Doctrines. New York: Kehot Publication Society. (1988). p. 52. 382 Michaelson, Jay. Hasidism and Nature: Between Negation and Affirmation. http://www.metatronics.net/lit/hasnature.html Originaly Published in June, 1998. (13th Jan 2006). 383 Schocet, Jacob Immanuel. Mystical Concepts in Chasidis:, An Introduction to Kabbalistic Concepts and Doctrines. New York: Kehot Publication Society. (1988), p. 53.

196ramifications: the world is separate and distinct from God, because God has made

it possible for it to be so. The primordial void is a real void, empty of any substantial

good or God. The only real good that is hidden deep within the world is the result of

the primordial catastrophe of ‘the breaking of the vessels’.384 The sparks, which this

catastrophe scattered into the world have to be redeemed, for their own sake, if not

for the sake of God himself.385 The world is, therefore, a naturally ‘un-godly’ place,

filled with darkness and a lack of God.386 But despite all the negative implications of

this understanding of Tzim Tzum, one positive quality that does emerge is that the

world does physically and actually exist, distinct indeed from God, but nonetheless

authentic and real.387

However, within Hasidic circles388 there is a subtle but radically different

interpretation of Tzim Tzum that changes our view not only of the metaphysical

universe but also, primarily, of the world. According to this Hasidic interpretation

Tzim Tzum was not a real event; it was metaphorical. That is to say, when God

withdrew himself from the place of the world it was only at the level of ‘created

perception’, but in truth God had not moved at all. In fact he remained just as much

in the place of the world as he had been before its creation. God is present in this

space in equal strength before and after creation, and the world is actually full of his

presence.389 On this view the existence of the world is metaphorical: it does not

actually exist, or exist as an entity separate from God. The world as we understand it

does not exist, because the only true existence is that of God. The human perception

384 Etz Chayim, Hechal Hanekudim (Sha’ar 8), Mevo She’arim II:2:1-11, Sha’ar Hahakdamos, Derush Be’olam Hanekudim, pp. 81-109. Also, Moses Cordovero’s Pardess Rimonim 5:4; Shi’ur Komah, chapter 60; Elima Rabbaty, Eyn Habedolach, I, Chapter 6, p. 53c.ff.; Schocet, Jacob Immanuel. Mystical Concepts in Chasidism, An Introduction to Kabbalistic Concepts and Doctrines. New York: Kehot Publication Society. (1988). Chapter 7. pp. 129-137. 385 Whose divine sparks are trapped within the physical world waiting to be redeemed. See, Schocet, Jacob Immanuel. Mystical Concepts in Chasidism, An Introduction to Kabbalistic Concepts and Doctrines. New York: Kehot Publication Society. (1988). Chapters 9, 10 and 11. 386 Zalman, Schneur. Likkuttei Amarim – Tanya. New York: Kehot Publication Society. (1989). Chapters, 8, 16, 31. Scholem, Gershom. Major Trends in Jewish Mysticism. New York: Schocken (1995).pp.175-177. Also see, Kohanzad, Max. Gnosticism in the Tanya. Published on www.xlubi.com 387 Sichos Kodesh, Shabbos Devarim ,and Shabbos Chazon, 5740. 388 Particularly within the Habad school, see: Tanya chapters 21-22, 48-49 and Shaar HaYichud Chapters 3-4, 6-7, 9-10. And Torah Or, Vayera, 13c, Likkutei Torah 2:51b. “The Religious Thought of Hasidism: Text and Commentary”, Sources and Studies in Kabbalah, Hasidism, and Jewish Thought, 5. 4, edited by Norman Lamm (September 1999). Sanford, Drob. Symbols of the Kabbalah: Philosophical and Psychological Perspectives. Northvale, NJ: Jason Aronson, (2000), Chapter 4. Schocet, Jacob Immanuel. Mystical Concepts in Chasidism, An Introduction to Kabbalistic Concepts and Doctrines. New York: Kehot Publication Society. (1988), Chapter 2. 389 Rabbi Schneur Zalman of Liadi, Shaar Yichud ve Emuna the third section of Tanya, Chapter 7 p. 164.

197that the world as separate from God is not, in fact, the case. This reinterpretation

of Tzim Tzum changes everything. The world, and evil are, in a sense, illusionary.

The only real existence is the existence of God, everything including the world, is

within God and ultimately is God.390

Devekut has radically different implications depending on which version of

Tzim Tzum we adopt. If the world really exists as a separate and independent

existence from God, then there is something to be negated, and the desire to negate it

follows on from the fact that that world by definition can only exist by the

withdrawal of God and his goodness. To experience God and his goodness one has to

flee from the world. If, however, the world is an illusion, then there is nothing to flee

from and negate. God is already here: devekut becomes the realisation of that fact,

the experiencing of God here and now, the manifesting of the intrinsic ‘godliness’ of

the world. Scholem seems to have made the mistake of assuming that Hasidism

simply continued to accept the Lurianic doctrine of Tzim Tzum, and thus when he

talks of devekut he understands this to imply the negation of what was considered to

be the real world. But Hasidism never understood the world to be real in the first

place.391 What is real is God.392 Devekut does not negate the world, but on the

contrary makes it more real. Devekut, especially within the teachings of the Baal

Shem and his followers, was an attempt to experience God within the every-day

existence of this world,393 arguably not in order to negate it but to reveal its true

‘godly’ nature,394 to make it more ‘godly’ and therefore more real. Physicality is the

product of our limited vision and understanding; in truth, however, it has no

existence distinct from God, but is a manifestation of Him.

To conclude this discussion I will return to the question of what Scholem

means by ‘messianic’, as well as to his ideas of what ‘redemption’ means in Judaism.

390 Tanya chapters 21-22, 48-49 and Shaar HaYichud chapters 3-4, 6-7, 9-10. And Torah Or, Vayera, 13c, Likuttei Torah 2:51b. 391 Schocet, Jacob Immanuel. Mystical Concepts in Chasidis:, An Introduction to Kabbalistic Concepts and Doctrines. New York: Kehot Publication Society. (1988). Chapter 2, who citets: Etz Chayim, Mevo She’arim; Shaar Hahakdamos. Tanya chapters 21-22, 48-49, and Shaar HaYichud chapters 3-4, 6-7, 9-10. And Torah Or, Vayera, 13c, Likkutei Torah 2:51b. 392 Rabbi Schneur Zalman of Liadi, Shaar Yichud ve Emuna the third section of Tanya. 393 Buber, Martin. Hasidism and Modern Man. Trans. Maurice Friedman. New York: Harper and Row (1966), p. 104. 394 Shaar HaKeria Shema in Imrei Binah by the Mitteler Rebbe, also Kuntres HaHisbonenus, Shaar Hayichud, the second part of Ner Mitzvah veTorah Or, where the Mittleler Rebbe claims that the physical world is itself the Or Ayn Sof.

198In the introduction to his collection of essays, The Messianic Idea in Judaism,395

Scholem claims that Judaism’s messianism is extremely different from

Christianity’s. However, this stark opposition between Judaism and Christianity is

hard to justify, and involves an unacceptably ahistorical essentializing of the two

traditions. What Scholem seems keen to deny is that there can be any authentically

Jewish basis for Christian ideas of redemption, or any correspondence between the

two traditions on this point. He explains his understanding of the difference between

Jewish and Christian models of redemption, as follows (emphases mine):

Judaism in all its forms and manifestations has always maintained a concept of redemption as an event which takes place publicly, on the stage of history and within the community… In contrast, Christianity conceives of redemption as an event in the spiritual and unseen realm, an event which is reflected in the soul, in the private world of each individual, and which effects an inner transformation which need not correspond to anything outside … Augustine…reinterpret[s] the Jewish categories of redemption, [as being within the] … community of the mysteriously redeemed within an unredeemed world.396

However, things are nowhere near as straightforward as this implies. On the one

hand, from an historical perspective, it can be argued that early Christian ideas of

redemption can be paralleled in the Jewish world in which it grew up.397 On the other

hand, voices within Judaism, mystical and non-mystical, have regularly asserted that

Judaism’s idea of redemption is not purely historical in nature.398 Scholem’s

authority for his blueprint of the Jewish idea of redemption seems to be Maimonides,

who defines redemption in a more historical and less spiritual or miraculous

fashion399 than possibly any previous Jewish writer, though, it must be conceded,

395 Scholem. The Messianic Idea, p. 1. 396 Scholem. The Messianic Idea. p. 1. 397 Wilson, Marvin R. Our Father Abraham: Jewish Roots of the Christian Faith. Eerdmans (1989); Young, Brad. Paul the Jewish Theologian: A Pharisee among Christians, Jews, and Gentiles. Hendricksen (1997); Davies, W.D. Paul and Rabbinic Judaism Philadelphia, (1980); Sanders, E.P. Paul and Palestinian Judaism. London and Philadelphia, (1977); Sanders, Paul, the Law and the Jewish People, Philadelphia (1983); Stendahl, K. Paul Among Jews and Gentiles. London (1977); Ziesler, John, Pauline Christianity, Oxford, (1983). Vermes, Geza, Jesus the Jew, London Fontana/Collins, (1977). 398 See Chapter 6 (here), Present spiritualization v. the miraculous future. Also: Isaiah 11:6-9, 65:25; Talmud Kethubos 111b-112b; Genesis Rabbah 20:56, Malachi 3:23; Talmud Erubin 43b; Isaiah 27:13; Zechariah 9:14; Joel 2:1; Zephaniah 1:16, Daily Liturgy, Siddur Tehillat HaShem, p. 55; Soncino Zohar, Bereshis, Section 1, p. 13b; Genesis Rabbah 498; Deuteronomy 30:4; Ezekiel 16:53; Jeremiah 29:13; Zephaniah 3:20; Lamentations 2:14. Talmud Megillah 17b; Zevachim 116a; Rashi on Sukkah 41a; Rosh Ha Shanah 30a; Tosafos Sukkah 41a. 399 Maimonides Hilchos Melachim 12:1-5; and cf. Hilchos Teshuvah 9:2; Perush HaMishnah, Introduction to Sanhedrin chap. 10 and Netzach Yisrael , chap. 42. Also see, Talmud Berachos 34b.

199glimpses of a more spiritual, less historical and politicised concept, are not

entirely lacking even from his work. Tantalisingly, as we saw earlier, Maimonides

ends his entire discourse on the Messiah and the messianic era with the verse from

Isaiah 11:9 promising that ‘the earth shall be filled with the knowledge of God as the

waters cover the sea’.400 What did Maimonides think was the connection between

Judaism’s ‘historical’ redemption, and the earth being filled with the knowledge of

God? Was he merely being poetic? It is hard to see how this ‘knowledge of God’ can

be characterised as an historical event, or as part of a public, political process.

Maimonides also claims that in the messianic era ‘there will be no more war,

no more jealousy… because the delicacies of the world will be lying on the road

side…’.401 This, on the surface, might seem to imply that a ‘historical’ superfluity of

‘material wealth’ will be the cause of the ‘spiritual quality’ of the redemption.

However, it is a commonplace of religious thought that wealth in itself does not

necessarily make one happy. Even if there was a complete ‘superabundance’, it

would not necessarily stop greed, hate or jealousy. Midrash Rabbah402 warns that

with increased wealth can come increased greed: ‘if a man wants one hundred zuz,

and gets them he will then want two hundred’.403 Thus material wealth alone cannot

be the sole cause of the more ‘spiritual’ aspect of the messianic age, and an ethicist

of Maimonides’s sophistication would surely have been sensitive to this fact.

There is a strong tradition, which Scholem seems to ignore, of depicting the

Messiah not as a political leader, but as a great Torah scholar,404 whose first act on

going up to Jerusalem will be to convene a great Talmudic shi’ur, at which he will

expound Torah and disclose its hidden mysteries.405 One of the most striking

expressions of this view is found in the eighth century Targum on the Song of Songs,

and it is firmly endorsed by Rashi in his commentary on the same biblical book.406

Also see Boteach, Rabbi Shmuel. The Wolf Shall Lie with the Lamb: The Messiah in Hasidic Thought. Pennsylvania: Jason Aronson Inc. (1993), pp. 233-242. 400 Maimonides Hilchos Melachim 12:5. 401 Maimonides Hilchos Melachim 12:3-5 and also in his commentary on the Mishnah, the introduction to chap. 10 of Sanhedrin. 402 Midrash Rabbah, Ecclesiastes 1.13. 403 Ecclesiastes Rabbah 1:13, Maimonides also cites this idea in his commentary on Genesis 25:8. 404 Isaiah. 11:2; Midrash Rabbah, Genesis 98:9; Midrash Rabbah,Numbers 65:2; Maimonides Hilchos Melachim 11:4. 405 Rashi on Song of Songs 1:1 406 Introduction to his commentary on the Song of Songs, see P. Alexander on the passivism of the Targum of the Song of Songs.

200One would be hard pressed to find a more mainline, non-mystical authority than

Rashi, and yet he, and many other traditional Jewish sources with little or no

affiliation to Jewish mysticism, claim that the Messiah, along with his political

leadership and kingship of Israel, will also be a wise teacher and a prophet. The

Talmud even places on the Messiah the unenviable task of resolving the as yet

unresolved Talmudic disputes.407 The political role of the Messiah is perhaps never

explicitly denied, but in many texts it is so de-emphasised that it effectively vanishes,

and instead the Messiah comes across as a much more spiritual, less political figure.

This tension between ‘political’ and a ‘spiritual’ models of messiahship runs

through the history of Jewish messianism. The example of Bar Kochba is instructive.

There were some, such as Rabbi Akiva, who accepted him as indeed the Messiah,

and he certainly played an active, political role.408 The debacle at Betar was a severe

blow to these messianic pretensions, but according to one interesting later tradition

what in the end disqualified him in the eyes of the Rabbis was not his military

defeats, but the fact that he was unable to fulfil the prophetic description of the

Messiah as someone who could ‘judge by smell alone’.409 In other words he failed a

spiritual, not a political or military test. Jewish scenarios of the messianic era, have

always had a strong spiritual component. The Midrash states that the reason for

creation will ultimately be revealed in the Future to Come, when ‘the world will be a

dwelling place for God’.410 Thus the aims of the redemption are by no means

pictured in a narrow political and historical fashion. According to many scenarios,

the only historical requirements that must be met for the redemption to be achieved

are an end to the oppression of the Jewish people,411 and peace on earth412 so that the

Torah scholars can study without interruption.413 Scholem, in effect, strips away the

deeply personal and spiritual aspects of Jewish messianism, and so undermines the

age-old Jewish yearning, expressed in a wide range of literature, simultaneously for

407 Commonly known within the Talmud as ‘Taiku’ –‘Tishbi Iteretz Kushious ushalaiot’, traditionally connected to the arrival of Elijah the Prophet. Talmud Bechoros 24a. 408 Maimonides Hilchos Melachim 11:3. 409 Talmud Sanhedrin 93b. ‘Bar Koziva reigned two-and-a-half years and then said to the rabbis, ‘I am Moshiach’. They said to him, ‘It is said of Moshiach that he smells and judges. Let us see whether you can…’ When they saw that he could not…, they slew him’. Soncino Zohar, Shemos, Section 2, p. 78a, also see, Chayoun, Yehudah. When Moshiach Comes. Halachic and Aggadic Perspectives. p. 112. 410 Midrash Tanhuma Naso 16, and Bechukosai 3; and also see Midrash Rabba Chapter 13:6. 411 Talmud Sanhedrin 99a; Berachos 34b; Maimonides Hilchs Melachim 12:2 412 Maimonides Hilchos Melachim 12:2 and 5. 413 Maimonides Hilchos Melachim 12:4.

201individual salvation and for the historical redemption of the Jewish people and

the entire world. Because he understands the term ‘messianic’ restrictively to refer to

real-time, public, political events at the eschaton, he can make no sense of viewing as

‘messianic’ the personal experience of the Zaddik or Hasid here and now. Nor can

the experience of devekut be ‘messianic’, because it does not obviously have an

historical, eschatological dimension.

The Hasidic messianism of the Rebbe and the Lubavitch movement in contrast to Scholem’s linear and historical account, is a complex combination of charismatic leadership, mystical insight, historical events, rapture and community. It is a narrative of hope and inspiration, of radical and creative innovation within the parameters of Orthodox Judaism. The Chabad followers and adherents of this doctrine believe that action, which takes place on the public stage of history, is part of the unfolding physical manifestation of the spiritual redemption, which the Rebbe initiated and has in some mystical sense already taken place. For the Rebbe every single mitzvah,414 every mundane act415 and every breath416 is in deed an opportunity to experience, anticipate, realise, manifest and bring closer the actual and historical messianic redemption, which Scholem so strongly believes is the only form of authentic Jewish messianic action.

Scholem sees it as characteristic of Christianity that it envisages the existence

of a ‘community of the mysteriously redeemed within an unredeemed world.’ In

other words, Christianity has always been marked by a strong sense of realised

eschatology: the events of the eschaton can be, and indeed regularly are, anticipated

here and now. Is there the possibility of a realized eschatology within Jewish

messianism? Can we find examples of Jewish ‘communities of ‘the mysteriously

redeemed within an unredeemed world’? If we can, then this calls into question

Scholem’s neat dualistic typology of eschatological scenarios, and his reductionist

determination to put clear water between Jewish and Christian messianism. I shall

attempt to address this through a midrashic reading of the biblical story of the

Exodus from Egypt. As the Midrash states, ‘Moses is the first and last redeemer’, and

provides the paradigm for all Jewish agents of redemption.417 The Messiah will be ‘a

prophet like Moses’,418 and there is a strong correlation between the redemption from

414 Sefer HaSichos 5752-1992, Volume 1, p.97. 415 Sefer HaSichos 5752-1992, Volume 1, pp.14-15.

416 Sefer HaSichos 5752-1992, Volume 1, p.131.

417 Shemos Rabba 2:4, and Devarim Rabba 9:9 and Zohar I:25b and 253a: the numerical value of Moses is the same as that of Shiloh. 418 Deuteronomy 18:15-18, also see Sefer HaSichos 5751, Volume 2. p. 788 (footnote 83).

202the exile of Egypt in the past, and the redemption from the exile of ‘Edom’ in the

future, which will inaugurate the messianic age.419

We pick up the narrative from the point where Moses has been chosen by

God and told to go and set his people free. Moses announces to the Hebrews that he

is their redeemer, and that he will take them out of Egypt. He also informs Pharaoh,

and proceeds to perform miracles and bring the plagues on Egypt. As the redeemer of

the Hebrews he has already in a sense himself to be redeemed, and to represent in

this world the powers of a world that is yet to be. This is the paradox of redemption:

the redeemer or Messiah by definition has to be himself redeemed to perform his

role. He has to be already anticipating and living in the ‘messianic’ age, outside the

confines of life as lived by the Hebrew slaves. Otherwise he would not be able to

speak to Pharaoh and cause miracles to happen. Miracles in Jewish thought have

commonly been seen as signs of the messianic age.420 The time gap between the

appearance of the redeemer and the ultimate realisation of redemption is hardly

material here. Messianic communities always regard the redemption as imminent.421

The question is whether they believe that the fullness of the redemption can be

anticipated here and now. The very appearance of the redeemer answers that question

in the positive, since he is already, in a sense, living in that world to come.

The redeemer in his own person anticipates the redemption,422 but does the

story of the going out from Egypt also present examples of the community

experiencing a foretaste of redemption? Again, the midrashic answer would appear

to be yes. The Hebrews, as a whole, were not affected by the plagues: they

experienced, according to the Passover Haggadah, light and joy and peace423 in their

homes, while mayhem raged around them in Egypt. Their foretaste of redemption

was not just physical but spiritual. The Haggadah continues to stress that it was God

himself424 and not an agent who was involved in afflicting the Egyptians in the

plague against the first born, and takes this to mean that Israel experienced before she

419 See. Mallin, Shlomo The mitzvah candle – Rabbi Yehuda Loeve Bezalel, Israel Feldheim (1993), and also Schneerson. Sefer Hitvadiyos 5751 Shabbos Parshas Bo, 4th Day of Shevat. 420 Maimonides Hilchos Melachim 12:3. 421 Greenberg, Gershon, ‘Redemption After Holocaust According to Mahane Israel-Lubavitch 1940-1945’, Modern Judaism 12 (1992). 422 Idel, Moshe. Messianic Mystics, New Haven and London: Yale University press. 1998, p. 280. 423 Also see Talmud Berachos 9a. 424 Pesach Haggada ‘Ani Ve Lo Saraf’.

203left Egypt, at midnight, the darkest part of the night, nothing less than a

revelation of the Glory of God,425 that is a foretaste of the future revelation of God at

Mount Sinai.

Just as the notion of God is religiously meaningless unless previously

experienced, so too, the ‘world to come’ and the future redemption, is meaningless

and virtually nonexistent to an individual or community which has no prior

experience of redemption. Since within the religious consciousness there is no sharp

dichotomy between ‘this world’ and ‘the world to come’426 a foretaste of the

messianic era, within an as yet unredeemed world, whether individually or

communally is a vital and necessary requirement.

Scholem underestimates just how innovative early Hasidism was. He insists

that, with the exclusion of Rabbi Schneur Zalman ,‘Hasidism seems to have

produced no truly original Kabbalistic thought whatever’.427 Elsewhere he seems to

imply that early-Hasidism was nothing more than a type of Lurianic Sabbatianism,

without its extreme messianism.428 However, as I argued earlier, just because the

movement, and its leaders, continued to use, especially in their public discourse,

certain traditional terminology, does not mean that its theology was basically

derivative. It made original contributions, as we noted, to the concepts of the Zaddik,

devekut, Tzim Tzum and Hashgocha Pratis. Rabbi Schneur Zalman, as Scholem

himself allows, was highly original. But was he the only one? As I have attempted to

show in this dissertation, the doctrine of Atzmus propounded by the late Lubavitcher

Rebbe, though rooted in many ways in Hasidic tradition was also highly original, and

its originality gives the lie to the claim that Hasidic thought cannot be theologically

creative. To find the creative core of Hasidism one has to look to its more hidden,

messianic tradition, which has from the outset powerfully sustained its charismatic

leadership and been the secret of its enduring popular appeal.

To sum up the rather complicated argument which I have tried to develop in

this chapter, the Rebbe’s messianism fits well into the history of Hasidic messianism:

it cannot be seen as an alien import. Hasidism from the outset was a much more

425 Talmud Berachos 9a. 426 Talmud Sanhedrin 99a, Berachos 34b; Maimonides Hilchos Melachim 12:2. 427 Scholem, Major Trends, p. 340. 428 Scholem, Major Trends, p. 340

204messianic movement than Scholem was prepared to allow. While not retracting

my earlier claims that the Rebbe was an original messianic thinker, there is a very

real sense in which key elements of his messianism can be derived from that of the

Besht. Firstly, with the spread of Hasidic teaching throughout the world, particularly

as represented by Chabad, one of the Besht’s conditions for the coming of the

messianic age has been fulfilled. The Rebbe and his followers would have been

perfectly well aware of that. Second, the Besht’s idea that the messianic age will be

anticipated, and indeed inaugurated, by individual acts of redemption, achieved

through yichud and devekut, has clear parallels in the Rebbe’s messianic theology. In

both messianic doctrines there is a strong sense of realized eschatology. Third, even

the emphasis in the Rebbe’s messianism on the individual messianic leader can be

paralleled in the Besht’s thinking. The Rebbe, as we argued, fused together elements

of Maimonides individual messianic leadership with the more diffused messianism

of traditional Hasidic thought, but neither the Besht nor other Hasidic thinkers

actually denied the coming of a great messianic figure. The Zaddikim were in a sense

messiahs, in the lower case, but that did not preclude the ultimate coming of the

Messiah, in the upper case. Indeed, there are strong hints in the sources that despite

the debacle of Shabbetai Zvi, the Besht himself had messianic aspirations. The

beginning should, wherever possible, be viewed from the end: the recent upsurge of

messianism in Habad has something to tell us about the nature of Hasidism as a

whole. The inherent messianism within Hasidism has, in the case of Chabad boiled

over, out from the private domain into the public sphere. The early Hasidic

messianism has evolved and developed through the generations, and in the case of

Chabad it has become bolder, less concerned and fearful that it will be classed as a

Shabbatian derivative. I would argue that it has revealed its self its true nature, it has

let its hidden secret ‘out of the bag’. Its appearance strongly challenges Scholem’s

supposition that there was ever a real neutralisation of messianism in Hasidism or

merely a public concealment. Scholem’s theory only works by adopting an

excessively narrow definition of messianism and an even narrower understanding of

Hasidism.

205

Chapter 11

The Rebbe’s Messianism and Modern Orthodoxy

The relationships between Hasidism and Jewish Orthodoxy have always been

fraught, though the intensity of the conflict has waxed and waned over time. It was

particularly bitter in the first few generations as the east European Rabbinic

establishment, the Misnagdim, based in Lithuania, closed ranks against the new

movement and did everything in its power to stop it in its tracks, including calling in

against it the secular civil authorities. The opposition took exception particularly to

the sectarian tendencies in Hasidism, to its use of the Lurianic prayer-book, and

above all to its new form of charismatic leadership, which bypassed study at the great

Yeshivas as the route to religious leadership in the community. The bitterness in the

first few generations died down and an uneasy symbiosis emerged between the

Hasidim and their Orthodox opponents. All this has been fully documented in the

scholarly literature.429 What I want to explore in this chapter is the reaction of

Orthodoxy today specifically to the Rebbe and to the messianism of the Lubavitch

movement. I will do this by offering a close analysis of the reaction to Chabad

messianism represented by David Berger’s monograph The Rebbe, the Messiah and

the Scandal of Orthodox Indifference.430 It must be stressed that this represents only

one, rather extreme, criticism of Lubavitch messianism from within the Orthodox

Jewish world. Others are much less antagonistic, but Berger’s monograph is to date

the most substantial and closely argued discussion of the topic to appear in that

milieu, and it offers a highly instructive case. It is a reaction mainly against the

continued existence, many years after the Rebbe’s death, of a messianic movement

within Chabad that still believes in the Rebbe’s messianic potential.

The genre of the book is interesting. On the one hand it has all the hallmarks

of a scholarly monograph. David Berger is a respected academic, with an

international reputation in the field of mediaeval Jewish history. The book was

published by a prestigious academic series, the Littman Library of Jewish

Civilization. And it can hardly be said to be popular in tone, since it requires

considerable prior knowledge of contemporary Judaism, Jewish messianism, Jewish

sectarianism, communal political infighting, and the traditional Jewish debate about

429 Hundert, Gershon David, Essential Papers on Hasidism: Origins to Present. New York: New York University Press (1991). Rapaport-Albert, Ada. Hasidism Reappraised. London: The Littman Library of Jewish Civilization. 1996. 430 Berger, David. The Rebbe, The Messiah and the Scandal of Orthodox Indifference The Littman Library of Jewish Civilization London (2001).

206

idolatry. Yet it clearly strays beyond the normal bounds of academic debate into

religious polemic. In his introduction Berger admits as much when he says that ‘it is

an indictment, a lament ... I do not write as a dispassionate observer ... a memoir’

(pp. 1-3). In other words his own religious Jewish standpoint of Modern Orthodoxy

has, by his own admission, strongly coloured his judgements. The book is a rallying

call to the Modern Orthodox camp, particularly its intelligentsia and rabbinic

leadership, to take a stand against contemporary Lubavitch messianism. It serves,

therefore, our present purposes well by offering insights into both the ideological

tensions between Modern Orthodoxy and contemporary Chabad messianism, and the

attitude of the academic world of Jewish Studies towards this phenomenon. The fact

that the one major academic study of contemporary Lubavitch messianism cannot

keep away from polemics, and is so openly ideologically driven, illustrates how

difficult it has been for academia to deal with this subject objectively — a point to

which I shall return in the conclusion.

Berger takes exception particularly to the view, held he believes by the

majority in Chabad-Lubavitch, that Rabbi Menachem M. Schneerson was, and more

importantly still is, the Messiah even after his death. He argues that belief in a

Messiah who dies and comes back to fulfil his mission is essentially a Christian

concept, and is therefore abhorrent to Jewish sensibilities. Towards the end of the

book he reacts strongly against what he believes to be a minority view within the

movement that the Rebbe possibly was/is divine. And he attacks the Orthodox

establishment for its lack of response to the heresy implicit in these views.

The documentation of Berger’s case calls for comment. His tone is personal,

and much of his evidence comes from encounters with members of the movement,

and debates which he had with them in a variety of forums. In his introduction he

describes how he had once been a ‘supporter’ of Chabad, particularly of its outreach

work in Russia, and explains how he slowly began to question his support,

particularly when the Rebbe died and his followers continued to insist that his

passing made no difference to his messianic potential. He catalogues his articles and

letters to Rabbis and different Jewish newspapers, and the responses that support his

claims. He quotes opinions given by prominent personalities within the Lubavitch

movement since the Rebbe’s passing, and argues against them. He does an excellent

job of chronicling the events, the publications, and the general messianic

proclamations, and uses these to support his contention that Lubavitch messianism is

‘heretical’ and represents the birth of a new Christianity. However, his appeal to the

primary sources for both the Rebbe’s and contemporary Chabad’s theology are much

less in evidence, and on a number of points his grasp of Lubavitch thinking can be

challenged. This is hardly surprising, given his own admission that he is ‘a Professor

207

of Jewish history... [whose] fields of expertise do not embrace either Hasidism in

general or Chabad in particular’ (p. 3).

Thus Berger is arguably not justified in criticizing the Rebbe, and thus

implicitly questioning the basis of his religious authority, for calling himself a

prophet, just because of his ‘correct predictions’.431 This criticism suggests that he

did not look closely enough at what the Rebbe himself said on this subject. There is

no evidence that the Rebbe ever claimed to be a prophet because of his own intrinsic

prophetic powers (though his followers had no doubt that these existed). What the

Rebbe does is more subtle and clever: he uses Maimonides’ laws of the prophet432 to

claim that he was a prophet by association, because he had been appointed a prophet

by the Previous Rebbe, whose prophetic status was validated by the fact that he was

able to predict correctly at least ‘three world events’. The relevant text is worth

quoting again in full:

A prophet that appoints for himself another prophet, he is a prophet (and this applies to the leader of the generation, and this continues in the generation that comes afterwards through his students). Behold he is presumed to be a prophet, and this, the second one, does not need to be investigated/tested; it is required to obey him straight away even before he makes a sign, and it is forbidden to question him, and to look into his prophecy, that perhaps it is not true, and it is forbidden to test him more than required …, as it says, ‘Do not test the Lord Your God by testing him with tests …’. Rather after it is known that he is a prophet, believe in him and know that God is within him, and do not think about and do not reckon to him …, in truth/reality...’433

Berger also fails to do justice to the subtlety of the Lubavitch position on the

messianic status of the Rebbe. He asserts that the movement believes that the Rebbe

was ‘with certainty’ (p. 1) the actual Messiah, (Moshiach Vadai) who died and will

be resurrected to fulfil his mission. This assertion is fallacious and misleading, it

obscures the fundamental Maimonidean distinction, noted by the Rebbe and held by

the majority of the Lubavitch movement, between the ‘Presumed’ or ‘Potential

Messiah’ (b’cheskat Moshiach) and the ‘Actual Messiah’ (Moshiach Vadai), as

mentioned earlier in chapters 5 and 6. Berger maintains that there is no substantial

difference in Lubavitch messianic rhetoric between the Potential Messiah’ (b’cheskat

Moshiach) and the ‘Actual Messiah’ (Moshiach Vadai), an assertion which is

unfounded and simplistic.

431 Berger, The Rebbe The Messiah and the Scandal of Orthodox Indifference, p. 57. 432 Maimonides Hilchos Melachim 5:5. 433 Schneerson. Sefer Ha Sichos 5752 Parshas Shoftim also see Maimonides Hilchos Melachim 5:5.

208

Berger tackles the issue on p. 9, claiming that the Rebbe could not even

be credited with the title of presumed Messiah (b’cheskat Moshiach) since “By

‘king’ Maimonides surely meant a temporal ruler with genuine powers of

compulsion who fought real wars…”, but as mentioned in chapter 5, I would argue

that even such an interpretation of ‘king’ is itself a problematic non-literal

interpretation, since a ‘king’ in the literal and halachic sense is someone who has

been anointed by a reconstituted Sanhedrin, which is supposed to take place after the

building of the Temple and therefore only after the arrival of the Actual Messiah.

Thus a straightforward reading would force us to conclude that a ‘king’ could never

‘arise from the house of David’ and therefore according to Maimonides the Messiah

could never arrive. Thus, in order to reconcile this inconsistency with the

Maimonidean principle of belief in the coming of the Messiah, a non-literal reading,

such as the Rebbe’s own ‘Rabbis are called kings’ is necessary.

Berger’s proof434 that the Lubavitch movement believes that the Rebbe was

‘with certainty the messiah’ comes indirectly from a petition within the messianic

movement declaring the Rebbe Melech HaMoshiach and not from the Rebbe’s own

writings. This declaration appeared in several publications435 although most recently

in the messianic magazine, Beis Moshiach,436 and is supposedly signed by over a

hundred and fifty prominent Cabad Rabbis. However, Berger has not noted the

unusual and unorthodox history of this particular document.437 This document was

drawn up while the Rebbe was still alive by Dovid Nachshon, an Israeli messianic

returnee who is better known for his religious artwork, than his religious knowledge.

Nonetheless, it seems that the Rebbe himself strongly encouraged his proclamation

activities. This unique rabbinical petition was fuelled by a combination of the

Rebbe’s own messianic aspirations and the strong messianic stirring among his

followers, and their reaction to his severe illness and ultimately his passing. The idea

behind it was based in part on the Rebbe’s own unique belief in the quantum and

transformative nature of a Halachic decree and a rabbinical declaration made by a

Beis Din. He believed that such pronouncements actually alter the nature of divine

and earthly reality, forcing God to comply with the Halachah. This declaration of the

Rebbe’s status as Melech HaMoshiach, was meant to quicken the revelation of the

Rebbe as the Messiah and to force God to bring about the messianic era. However,

Melech HaMoshiach is a title traditionally used for any anointed King of Israel,

434 Berger, The Rebbe The Messiah and the Scandal of Orthodox Indifference. pp. 56-57. 435 Jewish Tribune (Toronto), 10th December 1998, p. 33. 436 Beis Moshiach 269, March 10

th 2000, pp. 19-23 of the English section; also 264 pp. 24-5 of the

Hebrew section. 437 The article in Beis Moshiach 269, pp. 19-23, details two particular messianic rabbis and their work to get other rabbis to sign this document. However, according to Hillel Blesoffski (Manchester 2005) what they fail to mention is that the document has evolved and the text has been added to and changed after the original signatories signed.

209

including the future Messiah. What must be pointed out is that although Melech

Ha Moshiach semantically implies that the Rebbe is ‘The Messiah’ it is technically

not an identical term to Moshiach Vadai. And the actual text of the official messianic

declaration is less than explicit with regards to its own declaration of the Rebbe’s

Moshiach Vadai status, and in fact says little to confer this status on the Rebbe.

However, Berger does have a point, the flirtation with the term Moshiach

Vadai is a worrying and troubling problem, and there are individuals who believe

that the Rebbe is Moshiach Vadai. However, I believe these are not the majority of

the Lubavitch movement as Berger implies. It is the Rebbe himself who most openly

flirted with the possibility of his being the real messiah, Moshiach Vadai, but he

never explicitly says so, and in the two crucial references speaks conditionally. In the

footnote438 with regard to the his placing of the foundation stone of 770, where he

uses the word remez, and also in Mishpatim,439 with regard to the declaration of his

messiahship, where he says ad (until it reaches the status of Moshiach Vadai). It is

his followers who purposefully play with the wording of the two titles and claim that

he is definitely the potential Messiah (B’Vadai b’cheskat Moshiach) the potential

messiah, or definitely the King Messiah (Bevadai Melech HaMoshiach).440 But these

plays on words still respect and acknowledge the gulf between these two halachically

defined states and in fact enhance them. But both Berger and similar Orthodox critics

of Chabad fail to distinguish between Moshiach Vadai and Bevadai b’cheskat

Moshiach.

It is highly doubtful that mainstream Lubavitchers, however messianic they

may be, could or would make the paradoxical claim that the Rebbe is the Mishiach

Vadai,, or would be unaware of the Maimonidean distinction. A potential messiah, if

he has shown the potential to be at some later date the ‘Actual Messiah’, is called the

‘Presumed Messiah’. Maimonides states that ‘only once he has built the Temple in

its place, is he to be considered the Actual Messiah.’ So there are clearly two

categories of Messiah, a Potential/Presumed Messiah and an Actual Messiah. I am

unaware of anyone even within the mainstream messianic faction who would say that

the Rebbe in a historical, Maimonidean and Halachic sense, was Moshiach Vadai,

the Actual Messiah, since the Temple has not been rebuilt in its place in Jerusalem.

(The Rebbe’s himself, as we saw in Chapter 6, flirted with blurring this distinction,

but this, I would suggest, was not meant to be taken too literally.) However, many do

438 See Appedix 2 (below). Schneerson, Sefer HaSichos 5752, Volume 2 . parts 4-5. 439 Sefer Ha Sichos 5752, Volume 2, p. 368. 440 Valperan, Rabbi Sholom Dovbear HaLevi, Yechi HaMelech HaMoshiach. Published by Rabbi Sholom Dovbear HaLevi Valperan. K’far Chabad Israel: ‘Ufratsta’ (1992). Valperan, Mevasser Tov. K’far Chabad Israel: ‘Ufaratzta’ (circa 1993; as no date is stated).

210

believe that the Rebbe is the Presumed Messiah, and will ‘definitely’, in due

course, prove to be the Actual Messiah.

In the context of this fundamental Maimonidean distinction, it is possible for

followers of the Rebbe to believe that there could be a ‘Potential/Presumed Messiah’

who passes away, but who, if no other candidate comes forward, will be confirmed

as the ‘Actual Messiah’ after the resurrection of the righteous.441 This minor

resurrection of the dead is said traditionally to precede the ‘building of the Temple in

its place’. The righteous who are brought back from the dead will help the Messiah

position the temple correctly, and teach the people how to bring sacrifices. Therefore,

even if the Rebbe is resurrected in the future with the other righteous, he will rise still

having the status only of ‘Potential/Presumed Messiah’, and will not be considered

the ‘Actual Messiah’ until the Temple is built in its place in Jerusalem and it is

proven that it was his contribution that ‘tipped the scales’ and brought about the

actual redemption.

Berger fails adequately to address the fact that the concept of a ‘resurrected

[potential] messiah’ was propounded by the Rebbe himself, and was not simply

originated by his followers in response to his death. Whether or not Jewish theology

has room for the possibility of a posthumous potential messiah is a moot point, but it

is one that, if problematic to the Orthodox Jewish world, could and should have been

addressed by them more than fifty years ago, when the Rebbe put forward this idea

in his early public speeches and lectures. This is an instructive example of how

Orthodoxy has failed to hear what the Rebbe was saying and to engage with it. On

many occasions during his long and, at times, controversial leadership of the

Lubavitch movement, Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson clearly asserted his

belief in the posthumous messianic potential of his predecessor, Rabbi Yosef

Yitzchak Schneersohn. This belief came out clearly when he claimed with regard to

the Previous Rebbe, more than a year after his death, that ‘He will redeem us!’,442

insisting that his predecessor was still the leader and the Messiah of the generation,

and asserting for good measure that he had not in fact died! 443

441 Midrash Chachamim Chapter 7, Zohar III:3, Aruch LeNer on Niddah 61b, and on Sanhedrin 90b. 442 Schneerson, Rabbi Yosef. Y., and Schneerson, Rabbi Menachem M., Basi LeGani Chassidic Discourses, trans R. Eliyahu Touger and R. Sholom B. Wineberg. New York: Kehot Publication Society (1990). p. 103. 443 Likkutei Sichos, Volume 35, Sicha 3 on Vayechi; also 15

th of Tammuz 5745: “The Rebbe has been

alive b’gashmiyus in the physical world for the past 35 years, each moment of which he grows stronger, healthier, more refreshed, and more alive! There is no rav or judge – absolutely no one – who can change the simple and obvious fact that the concept of yerusha [inheritance] is completely inapplicable, G-d forbid, since ‘he is alive’; one cannot speak of yerusha when he still lives.” Also: http://www.beismoshiach.org/Moshiach/moshiach359.htm (16th Jan 2006).

211

The following are a few examples of the Rebbe’s own belief in the

posthumous messianic potential of his predecessor:

Just as until now it was clear to every one of us that the Rebbe would lead us to greet our righteous Moshiach, so should it be clear now. What happened [i.e., the Previous Rebbe’s death] is only from our material point of view. It is nothing more than a trial, this being one of the tests of the birth-pangs of Moshiach, which will need to occur before the arrival of the righteous redeemer. The sole purpose of these tests is to conceal the truth [of the workings of G-d in the world].

This leaves us with a need to understand why the Torah requires us now to say Kaddish, and [similar mourning practices].

The intent of the test is to draw out the powers and strength necessary to overcome it. This in turn removes the concealment and reveals the truth (as explained in Chasidic teaching). Through strengthening our connection [to him] by means of studying his teachings and following his instructions, we will immediately merit (since we are on the edge of the redemption) to see the Rebbe again, in the material sense, and that he should lead us to the Redemption.

(Sicha of Shabbos Terumah 5710--February 25, 1950)

. . . the Rebbe, my father-in-law, will come, in a physical body, and take us out of exile!

Although in chronological order, the advent of Moshiach will precede techiyas hamaisim [the resurrection of the dead], special individuals will nonetheless be resurrected prior to Moshiach’s coming.444

And first and foremost, the Rebbe, my father-in-law, will once again enclothe himself in [his] body, and return. (In reality, it makes no difference how he comes, whether through the door, through the window, or through the roof ...). He will then gather all the Jewish people together and proclaim, ‘The time has come to leave exile! Come, let us go to our Holy Land!’

(2nd day of Shavuos, 5710, unedited -- May 23, 1950)

With this inspiration, with the strength of Moshe, they [the Hasidim] are able to walk to the synagogues and to explain to the Jews whom they meet there, that in fact 'Moshe did not die,' and that nothing has changed, except that it has left a possibility for [questions] to be raised.

If they accept this, fine. What if they have queries or arguments? When a young pupil asks a question to which his teacher does not know an answer, the teacher [sometimes] punishes the child, saying, ‘When you grow up, you'll understand!’ . . .

444 Midrash Chachamim Chapter 7, Zohar III:3, Aruch LeNer on Niddah 61b, and on Sanhedrin 90b.

212This is how one must respond to a Jew who asks questions. ‘This is the fact, whether you understand it or not!’

(Simchas Torah, 5711, unedited-- October 4, 1950)

Every shliach must prepare himself and prepare all the Jews of his neighborhood, city, etc., to greet the righteous Moshiach. [This is done] through explaining the concept of Moshiach, as discussed in the Written and Oral Torah, in a way that each and every individual can relate to, according to his understanding. This especially includes studying [with him] topics in Torah which discuss Moshiach and Redemption, in a way of chokhma, bina, and da'as [wisdom, comprehension, and knowledge, which make up the acronym Chabad].

Does all this apply now as well? The Rebbe, who descends from the House of David . . ., he bore our maladies . . . Speedily in our days, he will redeem his flock from both the spiritual and physical exile . . . Then, we will merit to see and be together with the Rebbe down here in a physical body, and he will redeem us!

(Maamar Basi L'gani, 5711 — 1951)

As regards that which occurred in the year 5710 [the passing of the previous Rebbe], . . . we are immediately going to merit the fulfillment of the Messianic promise, ‘Awake and give praise, those who rest in the dust,’ as stated in Zohar, that Zaddikim and Jewish leaders of the generation will arise immediately . . .Some people ask in amazement, ‘How can you say such radically wild statements?’

The answer is two-fold: Firstly, since we currently find ourselves in a ‘wild’ period of time, when darkness enshrouds the earth, . . . it is necessary to say ‘wild’ things . . . Secondly, and essentially, this is no ‘wild’ matter at all! Every Jew says it in prayer every day . . . Moreover, it is one of the thirteen fundamentals of faith . . . [As the Rambam writes concerning Moshiach] ‘Anyone who does not believe in him, or does not anticipate his coming, is not only rejecting the Prophets, but is rejecting the Torah and Moshe Rabbeinu!’ After all this, why the astonishment and wonder that we are speaking about the fulfillment of the promise ‘Awake and give praise, those who rest in the dust’? How can one possibly say that such statements are ‘wild’!? . . .

(Shabbos Ha'azinu, 5746, unedited--September 28, 1985)

All of the above examples shows that a belief in the posthumous messianic potential

of a Presumed Messiah is central to the Rebbe’s own religious beliefs, and not

something which the Lubavitch movement invented when the Rebbe died. It is this

fact that seems to highlight a marked reluctance on the part of Berger to challenge

the Rebbe himself. He talks about the growth of the movement, the messianic and

213

anti-messianic factions, the different rabbinical statements decrying Chabad,

mainly his own, or those supporting the Rebbe’s messianic status. He assiduously

gathers articles, letters, and responses that build a detailed picture of the external

character of Lubavitch messianism, but he hardly mentions the Rebbe’s own

teaching or involvement in the phenomenon. This is rather revealing, and calls for

some comment, since it seems to reflect a rather common pattern in the response of

the Orthodox world to the Lubavitch messianic movement.

It is hard to overestimate the impact the Rebbe had in the wider Jewish world.

I have said something about this at the beginning of the present dissertation. He was

lionized by Jews of all religious parties and none. The vast majority of Jews from all

denominations would not have hesitated to call the Rebbe in his lifetime a ‘Zaddik’

(at least in the general sense of a righteous, pious individual). Even members of other

Hasidic groups greatly revered him. I once met a Hasid belonging to Satmar, the

traditional Hasidic opponents of Lubavitch, who said, ‘Despite our differences, we

know the Rebbe is a Zaddik, and I even got a blessing from him, and my child was

born because of his blessing’. There was close to universal agreement that the Rebbe

was a great modern Jewish saint, who had almost single-handedly turned the tide of

assimilation, and brought many Jews back to their roots. This Jewish consensus was

widely reported in the non-Jewish world, which was willing for a time to accord the

Rebbe the status of a great Jewish sage and guru. To have admitted, on closer

inspection, that this assessment was badly wrong, and that the Jewish world had been

duped, and so to lose face before the goyim, was not easy. It was easier to suppose

that the ‘Rebbe himself never actually said he was the Messiah’, and that ‘the

messianic movement was all the doing of some of his fanatical followers’. This, as I

have argued in this thesis, was very far from the truth. Berger’s failure to discuss in

any depth the Rebbe’s own views lends some credence to this view. He is very

careful not to call the Rebbe himself a heretic and a false prophet, who ended up

producing a Christianized form of Judaism — charges which can be plausibly made

and which should be objectively considered. It is an apologetic ploy to blame the

followers in order to save the leader: he was misrepresented or misled by them. It is

also easier to ‘take on’ the followers and refute them, than to deal directly with the

thought of a formidable religious genius like the Rebbe.

The most interesting aspect of Berger’s case, however, is the analogies which

he sees between the Lubavitch messianic movement and Christianity, and the fact

that he regards these analogies as being so obviously damning. There is a certain

appropriateness, possibly even predictability, in this line of argument coming from a

scholar who is an authority on the Jewish-Christian controversy, and whose previous

214

monograph was entitled The Jewish-Christian Debate in the High Middle

Ages.445 He would not be the first to have seen certain similarities between Hasidism

and Christianity. There are obvious parallels between the role of the Zaddik and the

role of Christ: both are mediators between heaven and earth, both are redeemers. If

the Zaddik happens also to be a/the Messiah, then the parallels will multiply. Some

of these parallels, interestingly, were noted by Christian scholars in the 1920s when

Hasidism first came to their attention, in part through the popularisation of Hasidic

tales by Martin Buber. Already in 1919 the German New Testament scholar, Karl

Ludwig Schmidt, had made a pioneering comparison of the Jesus of the Gospels and

the Baal Shem Tov of the Shivhei ha-Besht.446 But what follows from this?

There is surely a strong element of ad hominem argumentation in Berger’s

case. By suggesting that certain features of Lubavitch messianism smack of

Christianity rather than authentic Judaism he touches a Jewish nerve and raises the

spectre of the long and bitter Christian persecutions of the Jews, the visceral

animosity and hatred between the two faith-communities, the Spanish Inquisition, the

Holocaust and much more. But this is all highly emotive: the substantive argument

here is hard to find. Christianity has had an enormous impact on Judaism, not just in

a negative way, but also more positively in the form of borrowings and

adaptations.447 For example, it would now be widely agreed among scholars that

significant Christian influences can be traced in the Zohar. Johannes Reuchlin and

other Christian Kabbalists who saw in the Kabbalah a much more ‘Christian’ form of

Judaism than appears in the Talmud were not imagining things.448 Does it follow,

however, that all these borrowings and adaptations from Christianity are by definition

inauthentically Jewish? That would be hard to defend in the academic arena.

This argument should be set in the context of the ‘parting of the ways’

between Judaism and Christianity. There is unquestionably a long tradition within

Rabbinic Judaism, going all the way back to the time of the Tannaim, of defining

Judaism in contrast to Christianity. There was a constant striving on both sides to put

‘clear water’ between two traditions.449 The result was that Rabbinic Judaism

downplayed elements of its own heritage, which it shared with Christianity. But

445 Berger, David. The Jewish-Christian Debate in the High Middle Ages. Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society (1979). 446 K.L. Schmidt, Der Rahmen der Geschichte Jesu. Akademie Verlag: Berlin (1919). 447 For a survey and assessment of this see Michael Hilton, The Christian Effect on Jewish Life. London: SCM (1994). 448 See Judah Liebes, Studies in the Zohar. State University of New York Press: Albany (1993), pp. 139-162. 449 On this see P.S. Alexander, “‘The Parting of the Ways’ from the Perspective of Rabbinic Judaism”, in: J.D.G. Dunn (ed.), Jews and Christians: The Parting of the Ways A.D. 70 to 135, Mohr-Siebeck: Tübingen (1992), pp. 1-25; Daniel Boyarin, Dying for God: Martyrdom and the Making of Christianity and Judaism. Stanford University Press. Stanford (1999).

215

arguably these elements were seldom entirely lost to Judaism, and they resurface

from time to time. It is possible to see Lubavitch messianism as picking up earlier

forms of the Jewish messianic tradition, from early Hasidism, Shabateanism,

Lurianism, and from the Zohar and Midrash, without having to posit a direct

contemporary Christian influence. The status of Christianity in Jewish theology has

always been somewhat ambiguous. It has been a hotly debated point whether or not

the Biblical injunction not to associate with idolaters applies to Christians.

Maimonides famously made a distinction between Islam and Christianity, regarding

the latter as falling under the ban of idolatry, while the former does not.450 However,

he may have been influenced in this judgement by the fact that he lived in Muslim

lands. Other Halachic authorities, particularly from the Christian world, have, on the

whole, been clear that Christianity per se is not idolatry, though some forms of it

may be.451 The mere fact of a parallelism between Christian and Lubavitch

messianism is hardly sufficient in itself to refute Lubavitch messianism, even

allowing that the parallelism is as strong as Berger supposes, which, as we have seen,

is open to question.

Another alarming parallel with Christianity, Berger claims, is that some parts

of the Lubavitch movement believe that in addition to the Rebbe being the actual

Messiah (Moshiach Vadai) some claim he was and is also God incarnate. The Rebbe

himself has made statements that the ‘Essence of God’ may be manifest within a

‘Rebbe’. However, the subject and issue of the Rebbe’s so-called ‘divinity’ is not one

that I wish to entertain at any great length within this thesis. The reasons for this are

primarily based on my understanding of the Rebbe’s overall theology. I am not going

to deny outright that such beliefs and ideas exist on the fringes of the movement or

even at its heart. There are indeed elements within the Lubavitch fraternity who have,

I feel, based on the Rebbe’s own teachings, erroneously focussed on the issue of his

divinity. During my research I have come into contact with individuals who profess

that they do actually believe that the Rebbe is literally ‘God the Creator of Heaven

and Earth’. However I feel that the exclusive focus on the Rebbe’s divinity, and

statements which call the Rebbe God, fail to appreciate fully the universal nature of

the ‘God’ of which the Rebbe is an ‘incarnation’. In my experience those who focus

450 Sacks, Jonathan. Clash of Civilisations –Judaic Sources on Co-existence in a World of Difference. http://www.chiefrabbi.org/dd/A_clash_of_civilisations.pdf (12/12/2003); Sacks, The Dignity of Difference: How to Avoid the Clash of Civilizations. London-New York: Continuum, (2002) Chapter 6 Judaic Views of Christianity and Islam . 451 Sacks, Jonathan. Clash of Civilisations –Judaic Sources on Co-existence in a World of Difference. http://www.chiefrabbi.org/dd/A_clash_of_civilisations.pdf (12/12/2003); Sacks, The Dignity of Difference: How to Avoid the Clash of Civilizations. London-New York: Continuum (2002), Chapter 6 Judaic Views of Christianity and Islam .

216on the Rebbe’s divinity, both within the movement itself and outside of it in the

wider world, as in Berger’s case, are assuming a dualistic understanding of the nature

of ‘God’ and the world. Within such a traditional worldview, the separation of God

from the World exists, as an absolute a-priori. They then mistakenly, simply replace

their own conception of the ‘Transcendent God’ with the personage of ‘The Rebbe’,

thus making the Rebbe equal to HaKadosh Baruchu the Holy One Blessed be He.

They do not consider that such dualism may be absent form the Rebbe’s thinking.

This view fails to grasp the monistic, mystical and inextricably interrelated

nature of God’s Essence and physical reality, as it is expounded in the Rebbe’s

teachings, as I have attempted to clarify in Chapter 7. His theology, although

ultimately pointing to the physical Being of the world as corresponding to the hidden

Essence of God called Atzmus, is universal. This means that, the ‘Essence of God’

exists in all places and at all times equally. Through acquiring a thorough

understanding of the Rebbe’s theology, it becomes self-evident that this

manifestation it is not limited to the embodiment of the Rebbe alone. The Rebbe is

equally calling upon every Jew to be the embodiment of the ‘Essence of God’.

Moreover, the chair he is sitting on, or the ground he is standing on, or the air he is

breathing, everything is equally‘God’ or Atzmus, and it is predominately the physical

being of world that most manifests that reality. In contrast, Christianity does not, as

far as I am aware, understand the nature of physical world itself to be divine or a

manifestation of the ‘Essence of God’. This means that the nature of Jesus’ ‘divinity’

and the incarnation are very different.

According to Rebbe’s view, everything is God and there is nothing else apart

from God. In the Rebbe’s theology, not only is he the embodiment of the Essence of

God, but his teaching is as well. Claiming to be ‘God’ has a very different meaning if

everything is by definition ‘is ‘God’ or at least ‘nothing but God’. So although for

both Christianity and Berger, the claim that a human being can be the divine

incarnate is very important and significant, within the Rebbe’s theology the question

of his, or his father-in-law’s ‘divinity’ is rather less startling.

The question still remains, however; if everything is God, why make claims

that an individual ‘Rebbe’ is the Essence of God incarnate? A possible answer is that

the uniqueness of the Rebbe’s ‘divinity’, as distinct from the divinity of everything

else in existence, is not a matter of actual substance, but rather of quality and

217

consciousness. It is possible to argue that it was the Rebbe’s ‘God consciousness’

that was the only thing that truly separated him from other physical manifestations of

the Essence of God. It is this primary shift in perception from the world existing as a

separate existence from God to an entirely different view where God’s being is the

only existence that there is. In as much as the Rebbe was, arguably, fully aware of

the nature of this ‘God/World’ reality, he reflected and allowed this divine reality to

be revealed through him.

We can see, then, that it is Berger’s non-Hasidic worldview, which regards

the world as not being of divine substance, as well as his insensitivity to

theologically nuanced concepts, that lies behind his theological attack. What is

significant for our present purposes is not whether the argument is in itself valid or

invalid, but that it is this sort of argument that is deployed by a Modern Orthodox

Jewish scholar to criticize Lubavitch messianism.

Berger’s attack on Lubavitch messianism irresistibly reminds one of Jacob

Sasportas’s attack on Sabbatianism. Jacob Sasportas (1610-98) was one of the few

voices to warn bluntly and openly of the dangers of Sabbatianism at the height of the

Sabbatian fervour, when the Rabbinic establishment, impressed by the waves of

repentance that were sweeping the Jewish world, suppressed their misgivings about

the movement. Sasportas argued that Sabbatian messianism did not conform to

traditional views of messianism, that it contradicted rabbinic authority, and that, like

early Christianity, it carried within itself the seeds of sectarian antinomianism.452 He

played ‘Cassandra’ for a while, only to be proved right, in the eyes of most Jews, by

Shabbetai’s apostasy. Whether the Orthodox establishment will in the end heed

Berger’s warnings remains to be seen. There are intriguing similarities and

differences between Sabbatianism and Lubavitch messianism. In both cases we have

a powerful charismatic Messiah who dies before completing his mission. In both

cases his movement survives the Messiah’s death. But there are also striking

differences. Lubavitch messianism is theologically more deeply rooted within

traditional Judaism (the Rebbe was a profound theological thinker in a way that

Shabbetai was not), and the Rebbe and his followers are much less overtly

antinomian than Shabbetai and the Sabbatians. Above all the dynamics of the

relationship between Orthodoxy and Chabad differ from the dynamics of the

relationship between Orthodoxy and Sabbatianism. Because of its outreach work,

which continues unabated even after the Rebbe’s death, Chabad and Orthodoxy

interpenetrate in a way that Sabbatianism and Orthodoxy never did. This is probably

452 Scholem, Gershom, Shabbetai Zevi: The Mystical Messiah, 1626-1676. Princeton University Press: Princeton NJ (1976), pp. 153-56, and Jacob Katz, “The Suggested Relationship between Sabbatianism, Haskalah, and Reform”, Divine Law in Human Hands. Jerusalem (1998), pp.504-530.

218

the main reason why Berger is still something of a lone voice and why the

bastions of Rabbinic Orthodoxy have so far been reluctant to answer his rallying call.

Though the Orthodox leadership may have misgivings about aspects of Lubavitch

theology, they are not unduly worried by its concept of a ‘posthumous potential

messiah’. They continue to be impressed by the ability of Chabad to contribute to the

renewal of Judaism and to create vibrant, Torah-observant Jewish communities.

In the end the Rabbinic establishment turned decisively against

Sabbatianism.453 The movement went underground and was persecuted by the

Rabbinic establishment throughout the eighteenth century. This could still happen to

Chabad-Lubavitch, but at this point in time it looks unlikely. The alternative scenario

is equally possible. If Chabad maintains its cohesion and continues to promote its

ideas within the Jewish world with the same vigour and success as it has in the past

thirty years, and if the rightward drift of the Jewish community and the exponential

growth of its Haredi wing continues, then we could see a ‘Chabadification’ of Jewry,

with the Rebbe and his ideas becoming part of mainstream Judaism.454 The

relationship between Chabad and Orthodoxy is on the cusp.

453 Scholem, Sabbatai Sevi, the Mystical Messiah, pp. 697-706. 454 Berger. The Rebbe The Messiah and the Scandal of Orthodox Indifference, pp. 117-133.

219

PART FOUR

THE DECONSTRUCTION OF JEWISH THEOLOGY

This concluding section attempts to broadly gather many of the general conclusions

and the major findings gained from the analysis. This includes a brief recap some of

the major themes of this dissertation, namely of the unfolding of the Rebbe’s

messianic personality and consciousness, the esoteric nature of his teachings,

academic silence on the subject of Lubavitch messianism, and a summery of the

theological implications of the Rebbe’s messianic theology. In particular it tries to

assess the extent to which, for all its Orthodox Jewish dress, the Rebbe’s messianic

theology is radical and challenges even subverts Orthodox Jewish theology.

Attached to this section are a series of Appendices giving actual samples of the

Rebbe’s discourses. Appendix 1 provides a full text of the discourse on the New

Torah discussed in Chapter 8. Appendix 2 provides a text of the discourse on the

Miniature Temple, which is referred to in Chapter 6. Appendix 3 is diagram of the

Schneerson dynasty.

220

Chapter 12

The Rebbe’s Messianic Thinking

and the Deconstruction of Jewish Theology

This dissertation has attempted to document and analyse a dramatic resurgence of

messianism within Judaism in the last quarter of the twentieth century, a resurgence

which has yet to receive the attention it deserves, which is hard to assess because it is

so close to us in time, but which may, in the perspective of history, prove as

influential as seventeenth-century Sabbatianism in the development of Judaism. The

time and the place of this messianic revival may prove to be significant, though its

causes are elusive from our close-up viewpoint. It happened in the aftermath of the

Holocaust and the founding of the State of Israel, not in the decimated cities of

Europe, nor in the Land of Israel itself, but in the United States, the ‘Goldene

Medine’, the new Promised Land, a land flowing with the ‘milk and honey’ of

material abundance and religious freedom. It took place in the full glare of the media

towards the very end of the twentieth century, but it was not obviously fuelled by

millennialism proper. The messianic fever that momentarily took hold of the Jewish

world was not merely the work of a group of emotional Lubavitch returnees, but was

predominantly driven by a strong charismatic personality, Menachem Mendel

Schneerson, with his veiled claims that he was the Messiah. The Lubavitcher

Rebbe’s impact as a Jewish Messiah has reaffirmed the pivotal role of messianism

(and indeed of mysticism) within Judaism, but in so doing has deeply problematised

it. Historians of Judaism have had the unusual experience of living through and

witnessing at first hand a major messianic revival in Judaism. What they have

observed should provide them with insights into earlier Jewish messianic movements

and, more generally, into the messianic dimension of Judaism.

Although a belief in the Rebbe’s messianic potential existed within the

Lubavitch movement perhaps as early as 1951, it did not emerge strongly till much

later, after he had successfully mobilised his movement to take full advantage of his

growing standing and influence. The Rebbe managed his image with great

astuteness, projecting himself as a Jewish sage, broadcasting his new religious

philosophy and ultimately his messianic message to as wide an audience as possible,

while retaining the persona of a humble but aloof charismatic religious leader based

in Brooklyn. Belief in the Rebbe’s messianic potential within the wider world did not

221

manifest itself until the mid 1980’s and came to a head with the attempt to crown

him as Moshiach in 1993 and, finally, on the day of his passing in 1994.

One of the most fascinating and revealing aspects of this saga was the

reaction of the Rebbe himself to the growing clamour from his followers for him to

declare himself Messiah. It was not that he proclaimed himself Messiah, and then

attempted to persuade people to accept him, which would have been the

straightforward scenario; rather, his followers experienced a dawning conviction that

he was the Messiah incognito, and attempted to force him into ‘going public’. The

Rebbe’s role in fostering this conviction, his teasing of his followers, discloses a

religious dynamic which may be of profound significance for understanding the

mentality of other messianic movements. This was certainly not the first time in

Jewish history that we encounter a ‘reluctant’ messiah (cf. Shabbetai Zvi) or a poorly

kept ‘messianic secret’ (cf. Jesus of Nazareth). For much of the period of the Rebbe’s

leadership he was, it would appear, deliberately ambivalent about his own messianic

pretensions and about his own belief in his messianic potential. However, although

he was reluctant to acknowledge unequivocally in public his messianic status, he did

make statements, and perform actions, both in private and in public, which

unmistakeably implied that he was the Messiah, though often in an indirect and

round-about manner.

The Rebbe’s message to his own community about his messiahship was

tantalisingly suggestive, though clouded by mystical rhetoric and ambiguity. He

would make clear allusions and none-too-subtle hints as to his messianic candidacy,

yet the next moment would passionately denounce and threaten with

excommunication anyone publicly attempting to utter such a possibility. Despite his

seeming reluctance to air in public his messianic potential, the Rebbe tacitly

supported this idea, and in numerous talks actively encouraged his followers to

proclaim it, though strongly encouraging them to do so within the norms of the

community to which they belonged. As this dissertation has tried to demonstrate, a

close reading of the Rebbe’s own words proves beyond any shadow of a doubt that

he had personal messianic aspirations and desired the actualisation of those

aspirations on the stage of history.

I have argued that such an inner/outer dichotomy is the expression of a deeper

schism in the psyche of the Rebbe himself, between an outwardly more conformist

persona and an inwardly radical, visionary, revolutionary self, which comes to

expression in a consuming preoccupation with a form of messianism carrying, from a

traditional Jewish perspective, antinomian overtones and implications. It is one of the

main conclusions of this research that the movement to proclaim the Rebbe as

222

Messiah, and to accept the possibility of a posthumous messiah or messianic

candidate, although kept on a tight rein by the Rebbe, was in fact driven by the

Rebbe himself. The ultimate origins of it lie deep in his own profound religious

longings to become not merely a spiritual redeemer and messiah, but the actual

Messiah of history.

This is not how some in Chabad see things. Ignorance of the Rebbe’s

messianic teachings can be found within the movement, and a handful of individuals

would categorically deny that he had any messianic agenda or any inkling that he

might one day actually be the Messiah. In this camp are even some who would claim

to have studied his writings. The dichotomy which we analysed between the inner

and outer doctrines, a dichotomy going deep into the Rebbe’s own religious psyche,

became externalized within the movement and led after his death to it splitting into

two opposed factions, one of which claims that the Rebbe is, was and always will be

the Messiah, and the other that nothing could be further from the truth.

The Lubavitch movement at the end of the twentieth century provides a richly

rewarding example of the complex psychological relationships that pertain between a

charismatic religious leader and his followers. For most within the movement the

Rebbe was and always will remain perfect, the righteous Zaddik. They consider him

incomparable in his greatness, an insurmountable gulf lying between him and them.

This psychology is common among people involved in such movements: the

relationship between the followers and the charismatic leader is one in which the

followers find value in their inclusion within a greater whole and/or in their total

submission to the leader. But this view can play itself out in practice in contrasting

ways. Two quite different camps can be discerned among the Rebbe’s devoted

followers. Firstly, there are those who believe that because the Rebbe was perfect,

they must therefore implement all his directives literally,455 without question; and

secondly there are those who believe that because of the Rebbe’s transcendent

greatness they cannot now, and possibly never fully will, understand his person, or

his teachings.456 When asked about the Rebbe’s messianic statements, the first group

will in effect say: ‘We will do and then we will attempt to understand’. In other

words, the Rebbe is perfect, and although at times he is difficult to comprehend, the

goal is both to do and to understand what he wanted. The second group, however,

seems to say that the Rebbe was uttering ‘heavenly words’, which were not meant to

apply to this world. He was a spiritual giant, who saw mystical and messianic things

that ordinary mortals cannot yet see, and perhaps never will. This group invokes the

455 Leyden, Liz. “5 Years After Death, Messiah Question Divides Lubavitchers” Washington Post, June 20, 1999. 456 See: http://chassidusunlimited.tripod.com/teaching.html (16th Jan 2006).

223

Rebbe’s transcendence as a way of explaining their inability to understand or

follow his teachings in their personal lives.

There is a third group, still nominally within the movement, which in its

desperate attempt to make sense of it all, and maybe to save face, privately claim that

the Rebbe’s messianic statements should not be taken too seriously. They were

uttered when he was getting old and possibly beginning to lose his mind.457 This is,

of course, a possible view to take, but it is rather self-contradictory for someone who

wishes to remain a devotee of the Rebbe and thus within the movement. It

dangerously undermines the Rebbe’s authority, on which the movement rests. If one

argues that the Zaddik’s teachings were affected by senility, one can hardly continue

to claim to be his follower in any traditional Hasidic sense. Like many great

charismatic religious leaders the Rebbe had a deeply divisive persona. Many of his

contemporaries, inside and outside the Lubavitch movement, respected him as an

inspired mystic, a saint, a Zaddik, a religious scholar, the head of a successful Jewish

renewal movement.458 Others, however, saw him as a fanatical and dogmatic

religious fundamentalist, a rightwing reactionary, a megalomaniac, a rebel and a

troublemaker.459

So much for what we have discovered about the person of the Rebbe.

However, one of the main contentions of this dissertation is that the Rebbe was not

just a religious leader whose significance lay in his charismatic personality. He was

also a religious philosopher and theologian of considerable acumen, who has left

behind him a body of enduring religious thought, which may well eventually earn

him recognition as one of the most important Jewish thinkers of the twentieth

century, of a stature at least equal to that of Rav Avraham Isaac Kook. His theology,

though messianic in character, is independent of his messianic persona, and can stand

on its own two feet, whether or not one accepts him as Messiah. Charismatic

personality and theological acumen do not necessarily go hand in hand. There are

many theologians who have no charisma. Equally there are many charismatics who

have no theological nous. Both these were found together, for example, in Isaac

Luria, but Shabbetai Zevi, though unquestionably charismatic, can hardly be

regarded as a significant thinker. The theologians of the Sabbatian movement were

457 In conversation with a few members of the movement who wished not to be named. 458 Goldman, Ari, L. ‘Rabbi Schneerson Led A Small Hasidic Sect To World Prominence’ The New York Times, June 13, 1994. (Section B, p. 2, Column 1). Also, ‘Lubavitch Grand Rabbi Dies’, The New York Times, June 13, 1994. (Late Edition - Final, Section B, p. 1, Column 1). 459 Friedman, Menachem. ‘The Ultra-Orthodox in Israeli Politics’. Jerusalem Letter / Viewpoints 104 (15 July 1990). Michael Specter, ‘The Oracle of Crown Heights’, New York Times Magazine, (March 15, 1992). Schifrin, Matthew. ‘“Diamond Joe Gutnick” and the Rebbe,s Prophecy’, Forbes Magazine (2nd December 1996).

224

people like Nathan of Gaza and Avraham Cardozo. The Rebbe, however,

possessed both qualities, and to a very high degree.

There are a number of reasons why the theology of the Rebbe has not

received the attention it deserves. The furore over his messianic status certainly drew

attention away from his thought. But the most fundamental reason for the neglect lies

in the fact that he expounded his theology in a highly obscure and inaccessible way.

His most important ideas are expressed in Yiddish and Hebrew, in publications

which are not readily available. As I showed earlier, the small body of his teaching

that is accessible in English has been ‘sanatized’, and fails to do justice to the radical

nature of his philosophy. His Yiddish and Hebrew discourses use a highly technical

Hasidic theological vocabulary, going back to the Tanya and other classic Lubavitch

texts, which proves difficult even for those knowledgeable in Lurianic Kabbalah and

the Zohar. His teaching is diffuse, scattered across a huge corpus of Sichos and

Ma’amarim, delivered over a long period of time. He does not offer anywhere a

synthesis or systematic presentation of his philosophy. His style is oblique, elusive

and paradoxical, and makes few concessions to clarity. As I suggested earlier, this

mode of presentation may have been a deliberate ploy to conceal the radical nature of

his thought. Even within the movement, there is probably only a small inner circle

that begins to grasp the implications of what he was saying. To the majority of

contemporary Jewish thinkers and academics, then, his thought is a closed book.

Ironically, the relationship is asymmetrical: though contemporary philosophers are

effectively cut off from the Rebbe’s thought, the Rebbe for his part, as we saw, was

not cut off from contemporary philosophy and science.

The Rebbe’s philosophy is highly complex and the nature of his discourse

means that it simply cannot be understood without a knowledge of his total

philosophical œuvre, as well as of the writings of the other Hasidic and Kabbalistic

masters. One of the points which I have stressed repeatedly throughout this

dissertation is the multi-dimensional character of his discourse. It is possible to read

his writings both in a superficial and in a more profound way. Many read him

superficially. There is certainly plenty of folksy wisdom, sound-bites, dogma and

religious rhetoric to satisfy such readers, providing sufficient guidance and spiritual

sustenance to a broad range of faithful within the Lubavitch community and beyond.

Most of the recipients of this material are not in any sense intellectuals, but this has

resulted in the neglect of the Rebbe’s deeper teaching and a marginalization of him

as a serious religious philosopher in the wider world and particularly within

academia.

225

The attitude of academia towards the Rebbe is particularly puzzling, and

worth pondering a little. If the analysis which I have offered in this dissertation is

correct, then in the Lubavitch movement in the late twentieth century, and in the

person of its leader, the late Lubavitcher Rebbe, we have a religious phenomenon

potentially of great historical significance. We have had the chance of witnessing at

first hand the emergence of a major messianic movement within Judaism, led by a

powerful charismatic religious figure. One would have thought that academics would

have seized with both hands the rare opportunity to document and study this

phenomenon, to gain direct insight into how such movements work, and to test their

theories against abundant primary data. But this did not happen. There have been few

academic studies of note of the Rebbe, or of the recent Lubavitch messianic

movement. One of the few, by David Berger, was critiqued at some length in the

previous chapter. This is all the more puzzling, because the study of Hasidism has

grown enormously in the academy over the past thirty years. It is widely

recognized460 that the chapter on Hasidism, the ‘last phase of Jewish mysticism’, in

Scholem’s Major Trends is the least satisfactory part of that seminal work, the one

for which he did least independent research, and which he presented in the published

text more or less as he had delivered it in his original lectures. Scholem himself

devoted comparatively little attention over his long career to Hasidism, but others

have massively supplemented his work. Most of this new research, however, relates

to the earlier phases of the movement. Little of it looks at the movement today. It has

been a major hazard of writing an academic dissertation such as this on

contemporary Hasidism that I have had so little other academic work with which to

interact, and from which to get guidance and help.

Why has academia marginalized the Rebbe in this way? A number of

possible reasons spring to mind. The first is political. The Rebbe has proved to be as

divisive a figure within the broader Jewish world as he has within Hasidism. He

polarizes opinion, and that makes it difficult for academics, as much as for anyone

else, to treat him ‘objectively’. In Israel there is, potentially, the linguistic and

conceptual expertise to handle his writings and his thought, but the ethos of Israeli

academia (as indeed academia in general) is broadly speaking liberal, and liberal

academics find it hard to give a fair hearing to religious movements such as

Hasidism which they see as ‘primitive’ and ‘unenlightened’. The Rebbe’s right wing

political stance, and his ‘interference’ in Israeli politics, did him no favours with this

460 Huss, Boaz, “Ask No Questions: Gershom Scholem and The Study of Contemporary Jewish Mysticism”, Modern Judaism, 25/2, May 2005, pp. 141-158. Gries, Zeev. ‘Hasidism: The Present State of Research and Some Desirable Priorities’ (Sequel) Numen, 34/2 (1987), pp. 179-213.

226

constituency.461 There also seems, as I have already hinted, to be a certain

reluctance, almost a timidity, within the academy in dealing with the contemporary

Hasidic movements. It is much safer to study the distant past, where the chances that

one’s views will be decisively falsified are remote. By way of contrast some

academics have being overly protective or apologetic about the Rebbe, his movement

and his ideas. He was, as I noted earlier in this dissertation, lionized by influential

academics like Eli Wiesel. In short, academia has at once ignored, belittled and

romanticised the Lubavitcher Rebbe and his movement, but what it has not, on the

whole, attempted to do is to analyse his works comprehensively, or fully to

understand the subtleties of his philosophy. The Rebbe and his messianic movement

pose a challenge to academic Jewish Studies which they have so far markedly failed

to meet.

What, then, have we discovered that is distinctive about the Rebbe’s religious

philosophy? My analysis of the Rebbe’s theology presented in this dissertation can

be summarized in three inter-related points:

(1) First, the Rebbe’s theology involves an extreme emphasis on the value of

the physical here and now, rather than on the metaphysical hereafter. The goal of

creation and history is to realise a utopia here and now on this earth, in embodied

souls, in the mundane and transient domain of everyday life — a view which Levin

calls a ‘Dira-Betachtonim theology’.462 This emphasis might not seem as radical in

the context of Jewish theology as it would in the context of Christian. Judaism, it is

often claimed, is less negative towards the physical order than Christianity, less

inclined to see it as fundamentally touched by sin. There is a sense in which this is

indeed the case: certainly Jewish theology does not strictly speaking have a doctrine

of the Fall of Man, which since Augustine has been so central to the Christian view

of the world. However, it would be a serious misrepresentation to suppose, as is often

popularly done, that Judaism has always been totally positive towards the physical

world. It too has a strong tradition of seeing this world merely as an antechamber to

Olam Habah.463 On this view this world is not an end in itself, with its own intrinsic

value, but a means to an end. It is an uncomfortable period of testing, a transient

passage between pre-birth heaven (in the Guf haNeshamos) and the here-after (in

Gan Eden), and ultimately the day of judgement (Yom ha-Din). The world is an

obstacle to be overcome; physical desires have to be suppressed or re-channelled

towards spiritual service. This view has worked itself out in a powerful Jewish

461 Elior, Rachel ‘The Lubavitch Messianic Resurgence: The Historical and Mystical Background 1939-1996’, in Schäfer, P. and Cohen, M. (eds.), Toward the Millenium: Messianic Expectations from Bible to Waco. Leiden: Brill (1998). 462 Levin. Heaven On Earth pp. 5 and 138. 463 Pirkey Avot 4:16.

227

ascetic tradition, influentially but by no means exclusively expressed in the

writings of the Hasidei Ashkenaz, with their catalogues of siggufim and penances to

mortify the flesh and suppress sexual desire.464 The Rebbe’s teaching ultimately

rejects this tradition and massively reaffirms the goodness of the physical world. This

affirmation of the physical is arguably even more unusual within Hasidic thought,

which in some of its manifestations has been deeply influenced by asceticism.465

(2) Second, the Rebbe stresses, to use classic theological language, the

immanence of God in the world. God’s ‘seat’ is no longer located in a superlunary

heaven, in a realm beyond space and time. It is located primarily in the physical

world. It is manifested in the temporal, material being of that world, and above all in

the selfhood of humankind. It is profoundly unclear in the Rebbe’s thought, and

probably deliberately so, whether he accepts a classical immanence-transcendence

dichotomy as being at all applicable to the being of God, or whether he subscribes in

any meaningful sense to the doctrine of a fundamental ontological difference

between spirit and matter, between body and soul. These distinctions seem to have

little meaning in his theology. The problem of the materiality of God is an old one in

Jewish thought.466 The ancient commandment not to make an image of God based on

anything in ‘heaven above, or in the earth beneath, or in the waters under the

earth’467 seems to point to a God who is beyond the material world, who is wholly

other. This idea was developed strongly in mediaeval Jewish theology,468

interestingly on the basis of Greek categories of thought.469 It found classical

expression in the neo-Aristotelianism of Maimonides, but we find it also in the

Zoharic doctrine of the Ein Sof, a form of apophatic theology in which God is the

negation of whatever is the world.470 But this idea is by no means universal in Jewish

464 Marcus, Ivan G., Piety and society : the Jewish Pietists of Medieval Germany, Brill, Leiden, (1981). Kuyt, Annelies, “The Haside Ashkenaz and Their Mystical Sources: Continuity and Innovation”, in: U. Haxen, H. Trautner-Kromann, K.L. Goldschmidt Salamon (eds.), Jewish Studies in a New Europe, Proceedings of the 5th EAJS Congress (Copenhagen 1998), pp. 462-471. 465 Baskin, Judith R., “Women and Sexual Ambivalence in Sefer Hasidim”, Jewish Quarterly Review 96/1 (2006), pp. 1-8; Jacobs, Louis, “The Mystical Piety of Rabbi Eleazar of Worms”, in Jewish Mystical Testimonies, pp. 48-55. 466 Winston, David, ‘Philo’s Conception of the Divine’. In Neoplatonism and Jewish Thought. Edited by Lenn E. Goodman. Albany New York: State of New York University Press. (1992). Wolfson, Elliott R. Language, Eros, Being: Kabbalistic Hermeneutics and Poetic Imagination. Fordham University Press (2005). Hughes, Aaron W. The Texture of the Divine: Imagination in Medieval Islamic and Jewish Thought. Bloomington, Indiana: Indiana Univeristy Press. (2004). 467 Leviticus 26:1. 468 Maimonides Guide to the Perplexed. 469 Winston, David, ‘Philo’s Conception of the Divine’. In Neoplatonism and Jewish Thought. Edited by Lenn E. Goodman. Albany New York: State of New York University Press. (1992) 470 Matt, Daniel. The Essential Kabbalah: The Heart of Jewish Mysticism. New Jersey: Castle Books (1997), pp. 39-50.

228

tradition.471 For the Rebbe, God’s being, like humanity’s being, is primarily

‘being-in-the-world’, and that immediately transforms and transvalues ‘being-in-the-

world’. This position is hard to justify in terms of orthodox Jewish theism, and it may

be because he was aware of this that the Rebbe articulated it in such obscure

language. His views are in some ways reminiscent of Spinoza’s concept of deus sive

natura,472 or Samuel Alexander’s ‘emergent deity’, or the thinking of some of the so-

called ‘process theologians’.473. But these are parallels, which cannot be pursued

here.

(3) The third distinctive feature of the Rebbe’s theology is his unusual

concept of redemption. His position can be seen as an extreme form of what in other

contexts might be called ‘realized eschatology’. There is nothing objective that still

needs to be done to the world: redemption is complete. All that is left is for us to

grasp this fact. Redemption becomes, in a sense, a psychological process of

reorientation towards the world as it really is, and not as we now perceive it to be.

The act of tiqqun has to be directed not towards the world but towards ourselves,

because the world, as the supreme revelation of Atzmus, the essence of God, is

already perfect. The world does not need changing, only the way we see it. Evil is

caused by humanity, through its inability to realize that the world is already

redeemed. Evil is largely self-inflicted; the problems we experience are mainly of our

own making. Humankind is already redeemed; it is simply that they do not know it.

This process of reorientation is what the Rebbe means by devekut, which is,

therefore, world-affirming rather than world-negating. It does not involve a flight

from this world to another, nor the annihilation of self, but rather a joyful

engagement with this material world and a quickening of the sense of self. Devekut

must begin with the individual. Each of us has the power within ourselves, and the

responsibility, to work out our own salvation; each of us is sitting on the keys to our

freedom. Redemption still has a way to run till the prophecy that ‘the earth shall be

filled with the knowledge of God, as the waters cover the sea’ comes to final fruition,

but that universal redemption must begin with individuals, and be achieved through

their aggregated efforts, not imposed by a messianic super-hero, or a deus ex

machina, from above. The Rebbe’s role is to bear this message. He is himself already

471 Bar-Ilan, M. ‘The Hand of God: A Chapter in Rabbinic Anthropomorphism’, in G. Sed-Rajna (ed.), Rashi 1040-1990: Hommage a Ephraim E. Urbach, Congres européen des Études juives, Paris: CERF (1993), pp. 321-335. 472 Ravven, Heidi M., “Some Thoughts on What Spinoza Learned from Maimonides on the Prophetic Imagination: Part Two: Spinoza's Maimonideanism”, Journal of the History of Philosophy 39/3, (2001), pp. 385-406. Also:, Melamed, Yitzhak Y. “Salomon Maimon and the Rise of Spinozism in German Idealism”, Journal of the History of Philosophy 42/1 (2004), pp. 67-96. 473 Mesle, Robert C and John B Cobb Jr. Process Theology – A Basic Introduction. Chalice Press. (1993).

229

‘redeemed’, in that he has himself already grasped the nature of the world. In his

own mind he probably saw himself as the supreme embodiment of ‘God

consciousness’ in this world. It was he who understood the nature of the world, and

was in touch with the supreme reality. Therefore he was more enlightened and

godlike than anyone in his generation. He probably regarded himself as the ultimate

fulfilment of Jewish potential, but he believed that others too could reach the same

level of consciousness. To embody this consciousness and to proclaim this New

Torah, was the essence of his messiahship. He acted in one sense like a Gnostic

redeemer, bringing saving gnosis to troubled humanity. As in Gnosticism,

redemption in the Rebbe’s thinking begins with a form of enlightenment. But in

sharp contrast to Gnosticism, the content of the Rebbe’s gnosis is not that the

material world is evil, but rather that it is good.

In the Rebbe’s theology there is nothing that one needs to do to experience

the essence of God (Atzmus). One should simply, truly be, since God’s being-in-the-

world and humanity’s being-in-the-world are essentially the same. The Rebbe has re-

introduced the primacy of ‘being-in-the-world’ into the ultimate ‘doing’ religion. He

has attempted to transform Judaism from a religion which strives to mend a broken

world, into a religion, which accepts the world as it is, as being perfect. His theology

points to the end of the transcendent God, replacing him with the God/World as the

supreme reality. The sole purpose of himself, of his movement, and of Judaism is to

spread this message, to tell the world that the time of redemption has come.

This outline of the Rebbe’s theology makes clear how radically innovative his

ideas were in the context of Jewish theology. His concept of a New Torah is clearly

disturbing in a traditional context, and at times he seems to flirt with antinomianism

and to deconstruct and subvert established ideas and hierarchies. The question

naturally arises as to how ‘orthodox’ his thinking is. This is a tricky question to

answer, for a number of reasons. That he was fully aware of how ‘unorthodox’ some

of his ideas were might be indicated, as we have several times suggested, by the

convoluted language in which he dressed them up. He certainly did not make his

ideas readily accessible, or go to any great lengths to set them out in clear, non-

technical language. ‘Translating’ them into clearer language for the purposes of this

dissertation has proved a major intellectual challenge. However, it is important to

realize that Judaism does not have the same precise concepts of ‘orthodoxy’ and

‘heresy’ as we find in Christianity. It is true that there have been attempts to define

the basic doctrines of Judaism, starting with Mishnah Sanhedrin 10. Maimonides’

famous Thirteen Principles was the most widely accepted of these definitions,

230

particularly in its abbreviated ani ma’amin and yigdal forms.474 But even these

professions of faith never achieved in Judaism anything like the status or authority of

the major creeds in Christianity. And even after Maimonides, other thinkers felt at

liberty to define the basic beliefs of Judaism in quite different ways. Though the

classic claim that Judaism is an orthopraxy, rather than an orthodoxy,475 is somewhat

simplistic, there is no doubt that what matters first and foremost is whether or not

one keeps the Torah. If one does, and does not propose to abrogate any mitzvos, or

change how they are implemented, then one will be allowed a considerable degree of

latitude in what one believes, or in how one expresses one’s worldview. The

observant have been able to hold and propound very diverse theologies, without

running the risk of being put under herem by their communities. So long as one

remains observant, the nature of one’s theology will seldom become an issue.

It will also depend on how the theology is expressed, on the rhetoric in which

it is dressed up, whether or not the ideas get a hearing or prove unobjectionable. The

Rebbe seems fully to have understood this. He spoke first and foremost to his own

community (which offered him its unquestioning trust), using words, images and

ideas drawn from traditional Hasidic discourse and rhetoric, a language with which

they were instinctively comfortable, and could understand. Following in a long and

distinguished tradition of mystical Jewish radicals, he attempted to use his own

charismatic authority and teaching to transform those closest to him, hoping that his

message would ripple out from them into the wider world. To the thoughtful within

his community, and even more to the sceptical without, some of his teachings may

have seemed to undermine traditional ideas, values and hierarchies. However,

because he had established himself as an orthodox Jew and indeed as one of the

heroes of tradition, he was allowed great intellectual freedom and given the benefit

of the doubt. However, this should not be allowed to conceal the fact that he was a

profoundly radical and disturbing thinker who, behind the traditional rhetoric and

traditional piety, was deconstructing and challenging some of the most deeply held

beliefs within the Jewish world.

474 Boteach, Rabbi Shmuel. The Wolf Shall Lie with the Lamb: The Messiah in Hasidic Thought. Pennsylvania: Jason Aronson Inc. (1993), pp.xi-xvii. 475 Kung, Hans. ‘The Mediaeval Paradigm: The Rabbis and the Synagogue - 2. The rise of orthopraxy: Mishnah and Talmud’. Judaism - Between Yesterday and Tommorrow Continuum International Publishing Group (1995) p.134. Hatley, James. "Generations: Levinas in the Jewish Context" Philosophy and Rhetoric - Volume 38, Number 2, 2005, pp. 173-189

231

APPENDIX 1

S C H N E E R S O N , S E F E R H A S I C H O S 5 7 5 1 , P P . 5 6 6 - 5 8 2

S E C O N D D A Y O F S H A V U O S∗∗∗∗

5 7 5 1

Discussing the issue of

“the New Torah that will come out from Me”

1 Moshiach and the New Torah

One of the foremost innovations of the messianic era will be, as Maimonides rules,

“in that time, knowledge, wisdom and truth will be abundant… for the King who will

arise from the seed of David (the Messianic King), will be a genius greater than

Solomon, and a prophet approaching the greatness of Moses. As a result of this, he

will teach all humanity, and show them the way of God,”476 “therefore, the Jewish

people will be great geniuses, knowing hidden things and grasping a knowledge of

their Creator, according to human ability.”477

On the verse, “for Torah will emerge from Me,”478 which was said in the

context of a messianic prophecy, our Sages explained in the Midrash, “A new Torah

will emerge from Me; innovations in Torah will emerge from Me;”479 “in the future,

God will sit… and expound a new Torah which will be given through Moshiach.” 480

It could be argued that this concept is alluded to in the above words of

Maimonides, that Moshiach “will be a genius greater than Solomon, and a great

prophet… and as a result of this, he will teach all humanity.” That is to say, since he

is a “great prophet,” therefore the “new Torah (that will) come out from Me” will be

revealed through him, and he will teach all humanity.

2 Two types of innovation in Torah to take place in the Future

∗ Said as a contribution to the “Torah Conference” held on the day after the festival. 476 Hilkhos Teshuvah 9:2. 477 Hilkhos Melakhim, at the end. 478 Isaiah 51:4. 479 Vayikra Rabbah 13:3 480 Yalkut Shim’oni, Isaiah 429; see also Radak and Metzudas Dovid to the verse, “for the Messianic King will teach…”

232

This fresh revelation of Torah falls into two broad categories:

a) The revelation of reasons and secrets of the Torah, as stated in the

Jerusalem Talmud481, “there are things that wet the mouth (the lips water over them

and close the mouth, preventing their revelation),482 as the verse implies, 483 ‘Let him

kiss me with the kisses of his mouth’” — these things will be revealed in the “New

Torah” of the future, “They484 have a promise from Him that He will once again

appear to them and reveal the secrets of its reasons and concealed facts.”485

Similarly, we find the principle, documented in many places,486 that Moshiach will

teach the inner parts of Torah to the all humanity.

b) Innovations (also) in the laws of the Torah, as the Midrash487 relates in

reference to the Leviathan fish and the Giant Beast (Behemoth), “How will they be

slaughtered? The beast will gorge the fish with its horns, and tear it up, and the

Leviathan will slaughter the beast with its fin… How could that be a kosher form of

slaughter? Aren’t we taught in the Mishna,488 ‘Any person may slaughter, and any

[hard, smooth] substance may be used for slaughter; and slaughter may be done at

any time; except a sickle, saw, teeth, or nails are prohibited since they are not

smooth and cause tearing’? …God says, ‘A new Torah will emerge from me, new

laws will emerge from me!” — Clearly, the messianic era will witness the innovation

of new laws, such as a jagged knife being kosher for slaughter.

3 How is the concept of a “New Torah” reconciled with the immutability of

Torah?

The above requires some clarification:

481 Avodah Zarah 2:7. 482 Pnei Moshe ibid. 483 Song of Songs 1:2. 484 Rashi ibid. 485See Tanya, Iggeres Kodesh, chap.19: “the reasons for the mitzvos were not revealed… and even in those places where there is a reason given that seems to make sense, it is not the entire reason. Rather, enclothed within it is the inner concealed wisdom…” 486 See Likkutei Torah, Tzav 17a; Sha’ar HaEmunah chap. 56, and following; and in other places. 487

Vayikra Rabbah 13:3 488 Chullin 15b, in the Mishnah.

233Maimonides writes,489 “It is a clear and documented principle of Judaism

that the Torah and its commandments are eternal. There is no possibility of change,

decrease or increase, as the Torah testifies,490 ‘Protect and observe everything that I

am commanding you. Do not add to it and do not detract from it.’ The Torah also

says,491 ‘Those things which are revealed belong to us and to our children forever,

that we may do all the words of this Torah.’ This teaches us that we are commanded

to observe all the words of Torah forever. Similarly, it says,492 ‘An eternal statute for

your generations,’ and another verse states,493 ‘It is no longer in Heaven,’ which

teaches that it is no longer the prerogative of any prophet to introduce a new part of

the Torah.”

How could there possibly be a new Torah, coming out “from Me”, through

Moshiach, in his capacity as a “great prophet”, when it is a fundamental principle

that “it is no longer in Heaven,”494 and, “it is no longer the prerogative of a prophet

to introduce a new part of Torah”?

With regard to the revelation of new reasons and secrets of the Torah — these

reasons and secrets do not seem to be taking place through analysis of Torah at the

four classic levels of exposition (Pardes),495 but rather, by God Himself through His

Messianic prophet. How could this be termed “Torah”? Would it not be more

accurately described as prophecy?496

With regard to the revelation of new laws of the Torah — since it has been

ruled that an uneven slaughterer’s knife is invalid, how could such a knife suddenly

become permissible in the messianic era? It seems to be an open breach of the above

principle that, “There is no possibility of change, decrease or increase; we are

489 Hilkhos Yesodei HaTorah, beginning of chapter 9. 490 Deuteronomy 13:1. 491 Deuteronomy 29:28. 492 Leviticus 23:24. 493 Deuteronomy 30:12. 494 See Bava Metzia 59b. 495 Like the mystical parts of Torah which have been revealed in the current era, “Most of the secrets of the Torah, which constitute the science of Kabbalah and knowledge of God, are hidden in the Aggadah” (Laws of Torah Study of the Alter Rebbe 2:3). “The words of the Sages that are based on the exposition of verse are the Aggados” (ibid. 1:4); see, at length, Shomer Emunim of Rabbi Y. Irgas, first debate. 496 For an explanation of the distinction between Torah and prophecy, see Likkutei Sichos, vol. 19, p. 177f, and sources cited loc. cit.

234commanded to observe all the words of Torah forever. Similarly, it says, ‘An

eternal statute for your generations,’ and another verse states, ‘It is no longer in

Heaven’”?

The “New Torah” consists of innovations beyond the scope of human

ingenuity

In order to resolve these difficulties, we must first address the principle of Innovative

Torah Thought which exists in the current era.

Our Sages coined a paradox,497 “Every insight that an alert mind was

destined to innovate498 was already given to Moses at Sinai.”

The two concepts seem contradictory: on the one hand the insight is officially

termed an “innovation,” implying that it has never existed before, and yet, “it was

already given to Moses at Sinai”?!

However, the point is that, at the “Giving of the Torah” Moses was given the

principles499 through which one may, “suggest the logic behind laws and analyze

them with questions and refutations, and delve deeply into the rationale behind and

the reasons given for the laws, understanding one thing from another, and innovate

new laws…So too with the expositions and homilies, to contemplate them so as to

derive the lesson in Divine service implicit within them… for most of the secrets of

the Torah — the wisdom of the Kabbalah and the knowledge of God — are hidden in

the homilies.”500 Therefore, when an “alert mind” toils to find an undiscovered

insight which is commensurate with the principles of analysis, then it can be rightly

termed (according to the rules of Torah) as his innovation. Nevertheless, since this

“insight” was derived through the application of the pre-existing principles given to

497Megilla 19b; Jerusalem Talmud Peah 2:4; Shemos Rabbah beginning of chap.47; Vayikra Rabbah beginning of chap.22; Koheles Rabbah 1:9, 5:8; and elsewhere. 498 Note that, “Every Jew is able to reveal hidden wisdom and innovate new ideas in Jewish law, Aggados, the revealed parts of Torah and the hidden parts of Torah… and there is an obligation to do so.” (Tanya, Iggeres Kodesh chap. 26 (p. 145a); see also Laws of Torah Study of the Alter Rebbe 2:2). 499See Shemos Rabbah chap. 41: “As if Moses learned the entire Torah? Rather, he learned the principles.” (See, at length, Likutei Sichos vol. 19, p. 252 and following, and sources cited loc. cit.) 500 Laws of Torah Study of the Alter Rebbe ibid.

4

235Moses at Sinai, he has merely identified a concept that was present, but as yet

remained undiscovered.

A similar process could be argued for the introduction of the “new Torah,” in

the messianic era. At the revelation at Sinai (which was a “one-time” event, never to

occur again),501 the entire Torah was given, including all the secrets of the “new

Torah” which will be revealed by the Messiah. All of this was included, hidden

within the Torah of Moses — but there is a fundamental difference between the

innovative insights of “alert minds,” throughout history, and the impending “New

Torah”.

Since the innovations of today are discovered via human intellect, (which is

limited), it follows, that even before they are found, these insights were hidden

within the Torah in a way that is possible for man to discover (by novel application

of the pre-existing principles). These ideas were hidden, but they were capable of

being found. However, the ingenuity necessary to discover the “New Torah,” is so

profound that it is beyond mortal imagination. God Himself will have to demonstrate

their presence (hence, “a new Torah will emerge from me”), since these insights are

so well hidden that it is impossible for any human mind to find them.502 Therefore,

with the advent of the messianic era, they will be ‘revealed’ by God in the form of

“Innovative Torah Thoughts,” ideas that are incomparably more powerful than our

present Torah — like the Sages said, ”The Torah that a person learns in this world is

nonsense compared to the Torah of the Messiah.” 503

The method by which changes will be made to Jewish Law

According to this approach, it is clear that the “New Torah” revealed by the Messiah

is, in fact, part of the pre-existing Torah given to Moses at Sinai, which has “no

possibility of change and… is not in Heaven”.

501 See Sefer HaMa’amorim 5756, p. 356; Hemshech Samech Vav, p. 23, 546; Hemshech Ayin Beis, vol. 1, p. 366; Sefer HaMa’amorim 5679, p. 291; Sefer HaM’aamorim 5685, p. 199; Sefer HaMa’amorim 5709, p. 57; and elsewhere. 502 In Chassidic Lexicon — a state of “concealed non-existence” [originally in the main text - Trans]. 503 Koheles Rabbah 11:8. See also ibid., beginning of chapter 2.

5

236a) With regard to the revelation of new reasons and secrets: Even though

the mystical secrets which will be revealed by God (“from Me”) are so deep that no

man could possibly discover them, nevertheless, they will be condensed into a

palatable form.504 Consequently, it is stressed that, “A new Torah will emerge from

me,” i.e., it will depart the heavenly realm and come into earthly terms.

It could be argued that the route by which the new Torah will escape its

heavenly garb and come into human comprehension is via Moshiach himself.

Maimonides stresses505 that the Moshiach is both a “great prophet” and, “a genius...

greater than Solomon (who was “the wisest of all men”506) ...and therefore he will

teach all humanity.” Hence, the New Torah will first be revealed to him in the form

of prophecy and then, through his great genius, Moshiach will be capable of

articulating these complex ideas in a way that is accessible to the normal human

intellect. Then, “he will teach all humanity,” who will become, “great geniuses,

knowing hidden things and grasping a knowledge of their creator according to

human ability.” That is to say, the lofty concepts of the “New Torah” will be

comprehensible and accessible to the human intellect.507

b) Concerning the innovation within the existing laws of the Torah (the

sanction of slaughtering the Behemoth with the fins of the Leviathan) — perhaps it

could be argued, that the innovation will be that the laws of slaughter recorded in the

Torah (which will continue to exist in the messianic era508) never issued legislation in

this area:

504 [The idea is that it takes a genius to make a great scientific discovery, but once found, the new idea is evident and comprehensible to every scientist.] 505 Hilkhos Teshuvah 9:2. 506 1 Kings 5:11. 507 This explains the need to add “according to human ability” (which would seem to dull the intensity of one’s knowledge of the Divine) - for without this detail, the New Torah is not commensurate with the principle that the Torah “is not in Heaven.” 508 See Tanya, Iggeres HaKodesh ibid. (133a): “How could it be possible that in the Messianic Era it will not be necessary to know the laws of the prohibited and the permissible… for how could one slaughter sacrifices or even non-holy meat if one does not know the laws of ‘pressing’, ‘passing’ and ‘pausing’ which disqualify the slaughter, and the laws of a defective knife? Is it possible that a person would be born who, through his very nature, knows how to slaughter without ‘pausing’ and ‘pressing’, and the knife will remain perfect without defect forever?”

237By way of introduction — the commentaries509 explain that the slaughter

will become permissible via a temporary exemption clause. However, this does not

require the introduction of a “New Torah,” since, “the early sages received a

tradition that if a prophet tells you to transgress a precept of the Torah… you should

listen to him (except for Idol Worship) provided that it is a temporary enactment.”510

It could be argued that the sanction to slaughter the Behemoth is not a

“temporary exemption clause” but an “innovation in Torah” (which will “come out

from me”) showing how the laws of slaughter recorded in the Torah never issued

legislation in this area.

[Furthermore, such a concept has even existed within a temporary exemption

clause — as the Rogachover Gaon writes,511 in connection with the temporary

exemption of Elijah at Mount Carmel. In that case, the exemption was derived from

the verse,512 “Take heed to yourself that you offer not your burnt offerings in every

place that you see,” implying that, “you may offer them any place that the prophet

tells you, like Elijah at mount Carmel.” [At first glance, this additional source seems

unnecessary, for the concept of a “temporary exemption clause” has already been

derived from the verse,513 “listen to him,” from which we learn, “even if he tells you

to transgress one of the mitzvos of the Torah… so long as it is for a temporary period

you should listen to him.”514] However, the innovation here is that, “this does not

come under the category of slaughtering sacrifices outside the Temple at all. Thus it

is a valid sacrifice.”That is to say, this is not a sanction to transgress the prohibition

of slaughtering sacrifices outside the Temple; rather, the prohibition of slaughtering

sacrifices outside the Temple never applied to this case.515 And it could be argued

that the innovation sanctioning the slaughter of the Behemoth with the fins of the

Leviathan will be of a similar nature — God will reveal an “innovation in Torah”

509 Chidushei HaRadal to Vayikra Rabbah ibid; Chiddushei Mahratz Chayos to Chulin 67b, and to Niddah 61b, and sources cited loc. cit. 510 Rambam, Laws of Foundations of the Torah 9:3. 511 Tzafnas Paneach to the Torah, on this verse, and sources cited loc. cit.; see, at length, Likkutei Sichos vol. 14, pp. 70ff. 512 Deuteronomy 12:13. 513 Deuteronomy 18:15. 514 Yevamos 90b; Sifrei to Deuteronomy 18:15. 515 Compare the distinction between a) the sanction to transgress the Sabbath due to a danger to life, where “the Torah says: ‘Desecrate one Sabbath for him…’” (Shabbos 151b, and sources cited there), where, the Torah permits a temporary desecration of the Sabbath; and b.) the offering of two lambs on one Sabbath, where the concept of “desecration” never applied in the first instance. (see, at length, Likkutei Sichos, vol. 16, pp. 237ff., and sources cited there).

238(which could not have been derived with human ingenuity in the current era, but

only by God himself) that the laws of slaughter never applied to this particular case.]

The reason why Godly revelation of new legislature will not be a breach of

the tenet that the Torah “is not in heaven,”516 is because Moshiach (being a genius

greater than Solomon) will explain the new innovations to the High Court in

Jerusalem in a rational way that meets their approval (according to the existing

principles and logic of Torah). This will then become fixed as Jewish Law, since the

High Court Judges are, “The bastion of Oral Law and the pillar of guidance. From

them, comes the Law for the entire Jewish People.”517 In this manner, the “New

Torah which came out of Me” will become like “laws learned through tradition…

laws learned through the intellectual application of one of the principles of Torah

exposition, and it will appear in their eyes that this is indeed the case.”518

What is the connection between revealing secrets of the Torah and

innovations in Jewish Law?

516 Furthermore, even an area where the Jewish sages were divided (and both arguments are from human intellect, applied to the principles of Torah exposition), should there be a sign from above in favour of one side (a heavenly voice etc.), there is a dispute whether one is permitted to resolve the matter in accordance with the heavenly indication.

Note the dispute amongst Halachic authorities concerning the Talmudic passage, “there was a dispute in the heavenly academy” (Bava Metzia 86a), whether the halacha favours the opinion of God, who rules “pure”, as the Alter Rebbe writes in Likkutei Torah, at the end of Tazria. Or, as the Rambam rules, at the end of the Laws of Tzora’as, in favour of the Academy that “it is impure, due to the doubtful nature of the situation.” The Kessef Mishnah writes that the Rambam rules this way because of the first, anonymous opinion, and R. Yehoshua argues about this issue in the Mishnah at the end of chap. 4 of Nego’im, and the law favours the first, anonymous opinion. This is despite the fact that God ruled “pure,” since the Torah “is not in heaven.” However, the Rash implies, at the end of chap. 4 of Nego’im, that the law is in favour of R. Yehoshua since “God ruled ‘pure.’” He explains that the expertise of Rabbah bar Nechmani, who said “my expertise in the laws of leprosy is second to none”, which was above the knowledge of the other sages of his generation, approached the level of Torah as it exists from God’s perspective. Thus, since the law follows the majority (and “is not in Heaven”) the Rambam rules like the first, anonymous opinion. However, the Rash rules in favour of R. Yehoshua, reasoning that, “this case is different, for the rule that the law follows the majority cannot be applied, for it is only relevant for disputes between sages of the Mishnah. This case is different for God rules ‘pure’”. Further discussion is beyond the scope of this work. [In this note, The Rebbe is citing examples where Halachic authorities favour the “opinion of God”, despite the fact that the Torah “is not in heaven.” The discussion centres around an incident recorded in the Talmud where God had an “argument” with the Heavenly Academy over the status of a doubtful leprous blemish, God ruled that it is pure, and the Academy unanimously disagreed. They decided to consult Rabbah bar Nechmani, who was the leading expert in the field, and eventually the Academy’s decision was that the blemish is “pure.”

The question arises: Does God’s “opinion” have any bearing in Jewish Law, considering that the Torah is “not in Heaven”? A number of opinions are cited: The Alter Rebbe rules in favour of God. The Rambam disagrees. Thirdly, the Rash (a major commentator to the Mishna) rules that God cannot be disqualified, for the rule of following the majority does not apply in a case of Divine intervention. Thus, there is some precedent that Divine intervention can have halachic validity.] 517 Rambam, beginning of Hilchos Mamrim. 518 Hilchos Mamrim 2.

6

239

Since the two ideas mentioned above — a fresh revelation of secrets of the Torah and

innovations in the laws of Torah — are two interpretations of the term “New Torah,”

there is, presumably, a connection between them. That is to say, the innovations in

Torah law will come as a result of the secrets of Torah which will be revealed.

An explanation is required:

What could be the connection519 between a) the “innovation in Torah” that

Jewish Law never discussed the issue of slaughtering the Shor haBor with the fins of

the Leviathan, and b) the revelation of secrets of the Torah — a connection so strong

that this innovation in Jewish law will only be revealed in the future with the secrets

uncovered by the “New Torah that will come out from Me”?

The manner in which new laws will be ruled

To explain the above — the future change in halacha as a result of a more lofty

understanding of Torah — we must first turn our attention to a similar issue,

regarding the debates between the schools of Shammai and Hillel.

The Talmud relates,520 that, “For three years, The School of Shammai and

The School of Hillel debated one issue. The former claimed that, ‘The law is like we

say,’ and the latter claimed that, ‘The law is like we say.’ Eventually, a voice came

from Heaven, ‘Both opinions are the words of the Living God, but the law is in

favour of the School of Hillel.”

Despite the legal principle of “ignoring Heavenly voices,” since “the Torah is

not in Heaven” — the law nevertheless favours Hillel, since, “they521 were the

majority. A Heavenly Voice was only necessary because the school of Shammai were

sharper of mind”522 That is to say, a Heavenly Voice is only ignored when it argues

519 C.f. the proof from “shatnez” — see Likkutei Sichos, vol. 3, p. 782, and sources cited there. 520 Eruvin 13b. 521 See Tosefos s.v kaan, Eruvin 6b; See Tosafos s.v. Rabbi Yehoshua — Yevamos 14a, Tosafos s.v. lo bashomayim — Bava Metzia 59b. 522 c.f Yevamos 14a.

7

240with a legal precedent,523 since “the Torah is not in Heaven.” However, when the

Heavenly Voice comes to resolve a situation of doubt, one may rely on the “voice”

since it does not oppose an existing principle of Torah.524 E.g., in the dispute

between the schools of Hillel and Shammai, where the law already favours the

School of Hillel, being the majority,525 but there is some confusion due to the fact

that if the School of Shammai were sharper of mind, then one can rely on the

heavenly confirmation of the ruling in favour of Hillel.

By way of a general introduction to the concept of disputes within the Torah,

let us turn our attention to the following passage of Talmud,526 “‘The words of the

wise are like goads (spiked sticks used to urge cattle)… the collected sayings, which

are given by one shepherd’’527 …This verse refers to the sages who gather in groups

and study Torah… Some rule ‘impure’ others ‘pure,’ some rule ‘invalid’ others rule

‘valid.’ A person might think, ‘How could I now learn Torah?’ Thus, the verse

explains, ‘they were all given by one shepherd.’ One God gave them, One Sustainer

said them, and they came from the mouth of the Master of all deeds, blessed be He,

as the verse implies528, ‘And God said all these things saying.’”

In a similar vein the Midrash relates,529 “To each detail… God showed Moses

49 arguments in favour of impurity and 49 arguments in favour of purity. Moses

said, ‘Master of the Universe, how will all of this be resolved?’ God said to him,

‘follow the majority. If the majority say it is impure, then it is impure; and if the

majority say it is pure, it is pure.’

These two passages show that (many) aspects of Torah can exist as two

contradictory ideas,530 both of which are true — “both are the words of the Living

God.” The legal ruling is resolved through the intellectual endeavour of Jewish

523 As in Bava Metzia 59b, concerning the dispute between R. Eliezer and the other sages, where the Heavenly Voice favoured the opinion of a single individual, opposing the principle of Torah law that the halacha is in accordance with the majority. 524 See the various opinions cited in Encyclopaedia Talmudis, entry Bas Kol, and sources cited there. 525 See Exodus 23:2; Rambam, Hilkhos Sanhedrin, beg. chap. 8. 526 Chagigah 3b. 527 Koheles 12:11. 528 Exodus 20:1. 529 Jerusalem Talmud, Sanhedrin 4:2; Midrash Tehillim 12:7; and elsewhere. 530 As it is evident that one intellect can produce two opposite emotions. Compare the verses “Every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually… I will destroy man whom I have created” (Genesis 6:5-7) and, “I will not again curse the ground any more for man's sake; for the imagination of man’s heart is evil from his youth” (Genesis 8:21), where the same rationale which first favoured guilt, was later used in favour of innocence.

241sages,531 according to their own understanding (“one can only judge what he

sees”532) by a majority vote, treating each case separately.533

This also explains why, in the majority of cases where the schools of

Shammai and Hillel disagreed, Shammai were stringent and Hillel were lenient —

because in those areas which were unclear their natural intellectual dispositions

(ingrained at birth, due to the source of their souls) pushed them (in general534) to be

stringent or lenient. This theme is common to all their disputes, and in each case the

law is resolved according to the majority. In any area where a doubt arose, due to the

fact that the minority were sharper of mind, the matter could be resolved by the

intervention of a “Heavenly Voice.”

Nevertheless, the rule that “the law is like the School of Hillel,” and even that

“the opinion of the School of Shammai, compared to the School of Hillel, is of no

legal significance”535, only applies in the current era. However, in the messianic

times, we are informed that there will be a change of heart, and the law will be fixed

in accordance with the School of Shammai.536

At first glance, if the Highest Rabbinical Court has already ruled the law in

the favour of the School of Hillel, with a majority vote, how could there possibly be

a legal reform in favour of Shammai? Evidently, there will have to be a re-convening

of a new High Court, and on this occasion, the vote will be in favour of the School of

Shammai.537

531 “In matters of intellectual analysis and logic a prophet is not superior to a sage. If there are one thousand prophets of the calibre of Elijah and Elishah versus one thousand-and-one sages, the law follows the sages, as the Torah dictates that one must follow the majority.” (Introduction to Perush HaMishnayos of the Rambam, s.v. hachelek hasheni at the end). 532 Sanhedrin 6b, and sources cited there.; Rambam, Hilchos Sanhedrin 23:9. 533 Even according to the explanation (Commentary to the Zohar of the Mittler Rebbe, Vayishlach 20b) that the great sages of the Mishnah and Talmud would look how the laws were above, and rule accordingly below — nevertheless, after the laws were seen above, they descended and interacted with human intellect, and thus this does not contradict the principle that the Torah “is not in heaven.” 534 Besides the few cases where the School of Shammai were lenient and the School of Hillel were stringent (Iduyos chaps 4-5), due to the fact that there must be some mutual exchange in all areas of holiness. 535 Brochos 36b, and sources cited loc. cit. 536 Midrash Shmuel to Avos 5:19; Mikdash Melech to Zohar I 17b; Likkutei Torah, Korach 54b; Tosafos Chadashim to Avos, at the beginning. 537 This can be deduced a fortiori from the following case: “A High Court who judge a certain point of law, how they perceive it to be (such as the disputes of the Schools of Shammai and Hillel) and pass judgment —if later, another Court is established who see reason to annul the previous decision, then the pervious ruling is annulled and the law is passed in accordance with the understanding of the new court. This is based on the verse, ‘according to the Judge that will be in those day,’ (Deuteronomy 17:9), implying that you are only required to follow the court of your own generation.” All the more

242The reason for this change of thinking could be argued upon the lines of

the Talmud’s statement that, “The School of Shammai were of sharper mind”.538 In

the past, they were unable to achieve a majority because most of the High Court

Judges were unable to appreciate their wisdom — rather like the Talmud

comments539 that, the law does not follow Rabbi Meir, even though, “He was the

wisest of the generation,” because, “His colleagues could not fathom the depth of his

wisdom.”540

However, in the messianic age, when Maimonides testifies541 that, “The

Jewish people will be great in wisdom,” (and all the more so those who were chosen

to sit in the High Court), then the majority of the High Court (or perhaps all of them)

will attain the “sharpness of mind” necessary to appreciate School of Shammai, and

consequently, will rule in their favour.

Thus, in the future there will be changes in Jewish law, ruled (as always)

according to the understanding of the human mind, due to the fact that there will be a

substantial increase in the depth at which Torah is studied. Thus, from a state when

the law favoured the School of Hillel, the law will change to favour the School of

so is this the case when the latter court is “greater in wisdom and popularity,”* in which case they are able to annul even a decree, enactment or custom** which is universal amongst the Jewish people (Rambam, Hilchos Mamrim 2:1-2). C.f. the passage in Yoma 80a: “Perhaps another court will arise and increase the measurements,” on which Rashi comments, “perhaps the Holy Temple will be built in their days, and a new court will convene and rule a new law.” * Presumably, the Supreme Court of the future will exceed all previously existing courts throughout the generations in both size and wisdom, for since, in the future “all Jews will be great in wisdom” the number of sages in the generation who approve and accept the words of the court (c.f. Rambam Hilchos Mamrim law 2) will be much greater than in previous generations. Furthermore, those who will be chosen from all Israel (who will be “great in wisdom”) to sit on the Supreme Court will certainly be great geniuses, more so than in previous generations. All the more so will the head of the yeshivah, the head of the court and the president acting on behalf of Moses — the Messianic King — all be geniuses far greater than the supreme judges of previous generations (This follows the interpretation of “greater in wisdom” by the Rambam in Perush HaMishnayos (Eduyos 1:5)). Their wisdom will even exceed that of Moses, since Moshiach will teach Torah to the sages of the Mishna and Talmud and Moses (see Likkutei Torah cited in note 12, and many other places). ** Besides those things which the court saw fit to forbid in order to make a “fence” to protect other laws (Hilchos Mamrim law 3), as the Talmud relates (Avodah Zorah 36a) “A court can annul any decision of a previous court except for eighteen things (decreed by the Schools of Hillel and Shammai together in the first chapter of tractate Shabbos), and even if Elijah and his court will come, they cannot overrule these decisions.” 538 Yevamos 14a 539 Eruvin ibid. 540 This explains the debate in the heavenly academy (cited in note 41) - for how could the academy argue with God? However, their ruling could only be issued according to their understanding, and thus when they could not understand God’s logic they were forced to rule in accordance with their own understanding (see Likkutei Torah, Tazria 24b and following). 541 Hilchos Melachim, at the end.

243Shammai, due to a general increase in the understanding of Torah, reaching the

“sharpness of mind” associated with Shammai. This is comparable to the sanction of

slaughtering the Behemoth with the fins of the Leviathan when “the new Torah will

come out from me.”

Questions on the above

To understand further the connection between the two innovations that will take

place in the future — the law favouring the School of Shammai (who are “sharper of

mind”) and the sanction to slaughter the Behemoth with the fins of the Leviathan

(since “a new Torah will come out from me”) — a number of questions must be

answered.

1) A legislative reform in favour of the School of Shammai will mean an

increase in religious stringency. Activities which are currently permitted, according

to the ruling of Jewish law in accordance with the School of Hillel, will become

forbidden when the change-over takes place. In contrast, the sanction to slaughter the

Behemoth with the fins of the Leviathan is a leniency; God will permit this form of

slaughter which is currently forbidden?

2) Stringencies are a protection against evil and sin. How could it possibly be

appropriate to introduce many new stringencies in messianic times (replacing the

current leniencies and sanctions of the School of the current era) when it is promised

that,542 “The spirit of evil will depart from the Earth” an increase in holiness,

beginning with the “new Torah that will come out from me”?

3) A majority vote in favour of the School of Shammai has in fact already

occurred in history. The Talmud records that, once, “they counted the votes and the

School of Shammai were in the majority.” However, the Talmud then proclaims

that,543 “That day544.... was as bad for the Jews as the day the Golden Calf was

made.”

542 Zechariah 13:2. 543 Shabbos 17a 544 The day in which the 18 decrees were passed where the School of Shammai had a majority over the School of Hillel — Tosefta Shabbos 1:8; Jerusalem Talmud Shabbos 1:4.

8

244

A vote in favour of Shammai therefore seems to be a disastrous event. How could

such a movement be associated with the messianice era, and the “new Torah that will

come out from me”?

The halachic basis of addition to Torah in the Messianic Era

We must first address a more central issue, namely, the halachic source545 for the

changes which will occur to the mitzvos of the Torah in the messianic era — a

section of Maimonides’ ‘Laws of Kings and Wars and the Messianic King’546 in the

Mishneh Torah.

After explaining547 how the Torah testifies to the Messianic King, based on

the verse548, “then the L-rd your God will turn your captivity”, Maimonides writes,

“Also in the section about Bilaam the concept is mentioned, and there it is

prophesied…” (and he continues to explain a number of verses). In a separate law,549

he then writes, “Also concerning the ‘Cities of Refuge,’ the Torah states550, ‘And

when the L-rd your God enlarges your border… then you shall add three cities more

for you…’ This has never occurred — and God does not make superfluous

commandments.” On this basis one is forced to conclude that the command will be

carried out in the messianic era, when there will be an addition (and perfection) in

the mitzvah of separating cities of refuge.

In a previous essay551 it was explained at length that this additional proof

which Maimonides brings from the concept of Cities of Refuge serves to stress that

the messianic era is a legal necessity from the point of view of the observance of the

commandments (in addition to the general concept that “the Torah testifies it” to be

true). The commandment to separate Cities of Refuge will only be observed in

completion (“then you shall add three cities more for you”) when, “the L-rd your

545 Unlike the sanction to slaughter the Shor HaBor with the fins of the Leviathan — which is based on a Midrash (homily within the Torah); and the concept that the law will favour the School of Shammai — which is based on texts of Kabbalah (secrets of the Torah). 546 This title is written at the top of the page of the Venice edition of 5284 (1524). 547 Chap. 11, law 1. 548 Deuteronomy 30:3. 549 Law 2. 550 Deuteronomy 19:8-9 551 Likkutei Sichos vol. 18, p. 280; vol. 34, pp. 114-122.

9

245God enlarges your border” in the messianic era. Since the promise of redemption

is thus a clause within one of the mitzvos of the Torah, it consequently acquires the

power and perpetuity associated with the mitzvos. In this vein, Maimonides

concludes his discussion of the matter, “The main point is that the laws and statutes

of this Torah are absolutely eternal. They cannot be added to nor detracted from.”552

(“The body of commands stands forever; it cannot be added to nor detracted from,”

as above chap. 3.)

The above passage of Maimonides is somewhat paradoxical. On the one hand

redemption is stressed here as a clause within the mitzvos of the Torah, which cannot

be added to. Nevertheless, this very fact itself is deduced from a verse which

describes additional mitzvos which will be observed in the messianic era, “then you

shall add three cities more for you.” However, it could be argued that with this

Maimonides is indicating that whenever an addition or detraction in Torah and

mitzvos is found in the messianic era [such as, changing to the rulings of the School

of Shammai, the sanction to slaughter the Behemoth with the fins of the Leviathan,

the addition of the New Torah], it is not to be understood as an addition or detraction,

but rather it should be compared to the case of Cities of Refuge (which is the source

in Halacha for the addition in Torah and mitzvos in the messianic era.) In this light,

any future addition in Torah is, in fact, incorporated into the one of the mitzvos as it

currently stands (as the mitzvah itself demands that three more cities be added). In

this manner, a perfect observance of the mitzvah is accomplished.

Why will cities of refuge be required in the future?

However, this proof of Maimonides requires some thorough explanation, because:

1. Why should God’s promise of a messianic era, together with its power and

perpetuity, be communicated to us through this command in particular, to build cities

of refuge?

552 The power and perpetuity is (not merely in spiritual terms, but also) in the literal sense — as Maimonides continues (in the editions which were not censored), “anyone who adds or detracts or abuses the Torah and claims that parts of the Torah are not to be understood literally is certainly a sinner and a heretic.”

10

2462. Furthermore, the whole concept of a city of refuge seems to be in

contradiction to the theme of messianism. The purpose of these cities is to provide a

haven for fleeing murderers,553 but in the messianic era there will not be any murder,

not even accidental murder.554 [A lengthy debate exists regarding the need for Cities

of Refuge in general (even the six cities, and all the more so the adding of three

cities, making nine cities.555] Why then, is the promise of a harmonious Utopia

communicated to the Jewish people by means of a command which expresses the ills

of society?

The emphasis on legal studies in the current era and mystical studies in

the future

The explanation would seem to be as follows.

Torah contains two aspects (in general):

(a) “The hidden delight which is hidden for You…”556 — It is the transcendent

wisdom of God (transposed into human language).

(b) “…Given on earth” 557 — Its purpose is to bring the World to be in accordance

with Torah (through activity, “Do...,” and restraint, “Don’t Do...”).

This distinction is somewhat similar to the contrast between Torah and the Commandments: Torah is God’s wisdom, whereas the commandments (positive and negative) are His directives as to how the world should be refined.

Even within the Torah itself two such dimensions are evident. There is the

study of Torah as a purely intellectual exercise, “to magnify the Torah and to

strengthen it” 558 “to expound and receive reward,”559 and there is the study which is

553 Deuteronomy 19:3. 554 This can be understood from the perspective of the murderer — for even an accidental murderer requires atonement (Rashi to Genesis 9:5; Rashi to Shavuos 2a (s.v. toleh)) for even the accidental occurrence is a result of excessive evil within the person (see Likkutei Torah of the Arizal, Parshas Vayikra; Tanya, Iggeres HaKodesh, end of chap. 28). It can also be understood from the perspective of the victim — for he is accidentally killed due to an offence he committed which was punishable by death, but no witnesses were present (Makos 10b; Rashi to Exodus 21:13; see Rashi to Genesis 9:5). 555 See, at length, Likkutei Sichos vol. 24, pp. 107ff, and the sources cited there. 556 Shabbos 88b. 557 Shabbos 99a. 558 See Isaiah 42:21; Chullin 66b. 559 Sotah 44a, and the sources cited there.

11

247aimed at knowing how to carry out religious practice — what to do and what not

to do.

Even within the intellectual approach to Torah, two areas are discernible,

legal and mystical.560 The legal studies emphasize more the Torah’s effect in

refining the World by various activities — the forbidden and the permitted, the

profane and the pure, the kosher and the non-kosher. This area is termed the “Tree of

Good and Evil”,561 since it is aimed at clarifying which activities are positive and

which are counterproductive. It is a study replete with false legal presumptions

(which are later refuted) designed to clarify truth from falsehood.562

In contrast, the mystical parts of Torah are termed, “The Tree of Life”,563

which has no association with the evil or the profane. This area of study does not

concern the refinement of Good from Evil; rather, it discusses Godliness itself — as

the Torah enjoins564, “Know the God of your father.”

These two dimensions indicate the primary difference between history up to

the present, and the messianic era.

Throughout history, the task has been to refine the World. This has been

achieved primarily through the study of the legal parts of the Torah — the Six Orders

of the Mishnah (including the debates of the Talmud and Responsa, Primary and

Modern authorities) which discuss the forbidden and the permissible, the profane and

the holy, the guilty and the innocent. (The only need for mystical studies has been to

increase a sensitivity to the easily-forgotten fact that these laws are all God given.)

With the advent of the messianic era, after the task of refinement is complete,

and Good has been extracted from the clutches of Evil, then, (in the words of the

Alter Rebbe565), “The study of Torah will not be connected with refinement, but to

reach the higher realms of Godliness. ...This will all be achieved through study of the 560 In reference to the following discussion, see Tanya, Iggeres HaKodesh chap. 26; Kuntres Aitz HaChaim chap. 11 and following; Likkutei Torah, Shir HaShirim 48a and following. 561Zohar III 124b, and Rayah Mehemna; c.f. Genesis 2:17. 562 And even study in the manner of “to magnify the Torah and to strengthen it” and “to expound and receive reward,” is connected with matters pertaining to good and evil. 563 Genesis 3:22. 564 Chronicles 28:9; See also Tanya, Kuntres Acharon 156b. 565 Tanya, Kuntres Acharon, 145a.

248mystical parts of Torah, which will cause the fulfilment of commands with a

heightened awareness of their Godly content..” (It will still remain necessary to have

a full knowledge of Jewish Law566, only, since forgetfulness will be eliminated, a

single review will be sufficient without involved study.567)

In the future, cities of refuge will preclude the possibility of evil

This leads us back to the issue of the Cities of Refuge.

The Midrash states568 that the commandment of Cities of Refuge is an

atonement for Adam’s sin569 (which is the source of all sins).

“Why was he banished? (Why was Adam banished from the ‘Garden of

Eden’ after the sin of the Tree of Knowledge?) Because he introduced the concept of

‘death’ for the generations to come. For thi, he deserved the death penalty

immediately, but God had mercy upon him and exiled him, like an accidental

murderer is exiled from his place of residence to a City of Refuge.”

In fact, the idea of a City of Refuge is connected with all types of sin. 570 Any

sin shares qualities with murder itself,571 since the abuse of energy for the purposes

of evil is like spilling of blood.572 Only, it is more like accidental murder, since the

true intention of every Jew is, as Maimonides testifies, “To fulfil all the

commandments and to avoid any sins”,573 (However, it can occur that a person is

incited by his evil inclination).98 Furthermore, the act of sin is “without

knowledge,”574 i.e., irrational, for “a person does not commit a sin unless he is

566 Tanya, Kuntres Acharon , 143b. 567 Tanya, Kuntres Acharon (145b). The Alter Rebbe continues: “It is possible, and indeed likely, that one will know all the legal parts of Torah through the study of the mystical parts of Torah, like Abraham our father of blessed memory. Therefore, it will not be necessary to study them (the legal parts) at all.” 568 Bamidbar Rabbah 23:13. 569 See Sefer HaMaamorim Kuntreisim, vol. 1, p. 191b and following. 570 Concerning the following discussion, see Ohr HaTorah, Massei pp. 1414ff.; s.v. daber el bnei yisroel… ki attah oivrim 5651 (Sefer HaMaamorim 5651, pp. 197ff.); s.v. vayedaber… v’hikrisem lochem arim… 5665 (Sefer HaMaamorim 5665 pp. 325ff.); The same title in 5712 and 5717. 571 Cf. Deut. 35:11; Genesis 9:6. 572 Likkutei Torah, Bamidbar 13c. 573 Laws of Divorce, end of chap. 2. 574 Deuteronomy 19:4.

12

249possessed by a spirit of folly.”575 Furthermore, “God delivers him into his

hand,”576 as the Torah states577, “he is awesome in his doing toward the children of

men,” “his doing is dependent on them.”578

The atonement for this, is to escape to a City of Refuge, which is analogous

to Torah — “The579 words of Torah are refuge.”580 In other words, just like a City of

Refuge is a haven to protect accidental murderers from “avengers of the blood”

(relatives of the deceased who seek revenge), so too, Torah is a refuge from ones

personal “avenger of the blood,” the Inclination581 to do Evil.582

Furthermore, Torah study is effective in achieving atonement for the “spilt

blood,” since one’s energies become re-devoted to holiness and Torah, which is

described as the “Torah of life.”583

However, in the messianic era, the Cities of Refuge will fulfil a different

purpose altogether.

Despite584 the perfect global refinement which is associated with messianism,

the utopia will not witness a total elimination of evil, since the possibility of evil

occurring will still remain.585 Consequently, Cities of Refuge will be required586 as a

575 Sotah 3a. 576 Exodus 21:13. 577 Psalms 66:5. 578 Tanchuma, Vayeishev 4. 579 Makkos 10a 580 In the phrase “city of refuge”. A “city” is formed from a group of houses, each of which is made of stones which alludes to the letters of Torah (Sefer Yetzirah 4:12: “two stones make two houses…”), which collectively form “houses,” the words of Torah, which when gathered together form a city - the entire Torah. The word miklat (refuge) is etymologically connected to the word klitah (absorption) which alludes to the human mind being absorbed in Torah, and the Torah being absorbed in the mind (as explained in Tanya (chap. 5), the intellect grasps and engulfs the idea, and yet it is also enclothed and surrounded by it). 581 Bava Basra 16a. 582 In a similar vein, the saying of our Sages, “I have created the evil inclination, and I have created Torah as its antidote” (Bava Basra 16a; Kiddushin 30b); “if you meet a despicable person bring him to the study hall” (Kidushin ibid; Succah 52b). 583 Note that the Torah is compared to blood, where the soul resides, and from which vitality is drawn to the soul. Thus the Torah states, “this is the Torah of man (Adam)” where Adam consist of the two parts, the letter alef and the word dam (blood) — see Shaloh, introduction to Beis Yisroel Beis Dovid (21a); Likkutei Torah , Bamidbar 13a. 584 See Teshuvos U’Biurim (Kehos 5734/1974). 11:1. 585 Only afterwards, in the period of resurrection will God eliminate the existence of evil from the world, as the verse suggests, “I will cause the spirit of impurity to depart the earth.” In reference to this era our Sages said (Niddah 61b) that “mitzvos will be abolished in the future”* (see notes of Yavetz to Rosh HaShanah 30; Iggeres HaKodesh end of chap. 26). On this basis, one is forced to

250mechanism against a possible spate of sin which could occur as a result of the

residual evil within the World. (In a similar way to before Adam’s sin, when evil was

not present but it was possible.)587

This (prevention of the possibility of evil) will be achieved by the

introduction of a new type of City of Refuge (three new cities) — i.e., the revelation

of new mystical teachings, which (as mentioned earlier) transcend any connection

with refining good from evil. This influx of mystical studies will provide protection

against even the possibility of evil.

And it could be argued that the six Cities of Refuge of the current era

correspond to the six orders of the Mishnah (including the explanations in the

Talmud) which explain all the detailed laws — of the prohibited, permitted, guilty,

innocent, impure and pure — which bring about the refinement of the world. The

cities which will be added in the messianic era, three cities, correspond to the

additions and innovations that will be made to the Torah in general — since the

Torah is described as “the threefold light” — which will be achieved via the

revelation of the inner parts of Torah.588

Furthermore, the three cities, which will be added in the messianic era, are

“in the lands of Kani, Knizi and Kadmoni which were covenanted to Abraham our

father and remain to be conquered. It is in reference to these that the Torah states,

‘And when the L-rd your God enlarges your border.’”589 It is explained in Hasidic

conclude that the feast of the Leviathan and the Shor HaBor (when the products of God’s slaughter will be eaten) must be in the earlier part of the messianic era before the resurrection of the dead**, for if “mitzvos will be abolished” there is no point in discussing whether “this is a permissible slaughter” and there is no need for an “innovation in Torah.” * For a detailed discussion of this saying, see the sources cited in Sdei Chemed, entry “mitzvos”; Teshuvos U’biurim 11.1 (and note 9). ** For a detailed discussion concerning the time of this feast, see the sources cited in Teshuvos U’biurim, chap. 11 at the end (note 23). 586 Similar to the point that in the messianic era “it will be necessary to know the laws of things prohibited, permissible, impure and pure,” even though involved study will not be required since, “they will be obvious and known to a Jew after a single review, and there will be no forgetfulness.” 587Sefer HaMaamorim 5679, p. 415. 588 See Ohr HaTorah, Massei pp. 1414ff: “The six cities of refuge are comparable to the six orders of the Mishnah… the three cities of refuge are comparable to the threefold light of Torah… when God will expand our borders three cities of refuge must be added which correspond to the secretes of Torah of the future.” 589 Rambam, Hilchos Rotzeach v’shmiras nefesh 8:4.

251thought590 that the conquest of the seven nations corresponds to the refinement of

the emotional attributes of the soul, which is the general task of the current era. In

contrast, the three nations (Kani, Knizi and Kadmoni) correspond to the three

intellectual faculties of the soul which will be refined in the messianic era when the

“New Torah that will come out from Me” will be revealed.591

Shammai - The elimination of hidden evil through a deeper form of

Torah study

Based on the above, we can now explain the change that will occur in the messianic

era, namely that the law will favour the school of Shammai.

In essence, all of their disputes follow one theme — the correct approach that

the Torah should take to refine the World:

For something which is clearly evil, both sides agree that the only appropriate

activity is total rejection.592 Such an entity must be labelled ‘profane,’ ‘forbidden,’

or, ‘invalid.’

As for innocuous (optional) activities which are definitely permissible, they

are unanimously acceptable, ‘pure,’ ‘permissible,’ and ‘kosher.’ Provided that they

are used for the sake of Heaven — “All your deeds should be for the sake of

Heaven,”593 “Know Him in all your ways,”594 — they will participate in the

refinement of the world, and become holy.

The point of contention concerns those questionable areas where it is not

clear if they should be permitted or rejected, since the evil within them is potential

590 See, at length, s.v. al teytzar es moab in Maamorei Admor HaEmtzo’ei, beginning of Deuteronomy. 591 See Sefer HaMaamorim 5679 and 5709, cited in note 26; and elsewhere. 592 See Sanhedrin 107b, and sources cited there; Hilchos Talmud Torah of the Alter Rebbe, 4:17. 593 Avos 2:12; Rambam, Hilchos Deos, end of chap. 3. 594 Proverbs 3:6; Rambam, Hilchos Deos, end of chap. 3; Alter Rebbe’s Shulchan Oruch, Orach Chaim, 156:2.

13

252and hidden. In such cases, there is a debate between the Schools of Shammai and

Hillel.595

The School of Shammai (whose souls are rooted in divine severity) have a

natural inclination towards stringency, to reject and prohibit even those activities in

which the evil is only potential.596 The School of Hillel, on the other hand (whose

souls are rooted in divine benevolence), have an inclination to be lenient, and

pronounce acceptable anything which does not demonstrate actual evil.

This distinction is alluded to by their names:597 “Shammai” is derived from

the word shuma, meaning appraisement — as in the term vesham orchosav598 (“and

appraises his way”), i.e. he follows a path of extreme care in avoiding even

concealed evil, which he outlaws. “Hillel” is related to the term behilo, meaning

shining, as in the phrase,599 “when his candle shone on my head,” alluding to

illumination and revelation, i.e. bringing holiness to a place where evil is present in a

potential, hidden manner.600

A further distinction between the schools of Hillel and Shammai is the level

of Torah which they employed to refine the world: The School of Shammai, being

“sharper of mind,” were capable of studying Torah in such a manner that they could

perceive its power to refine even potential evil (i.e., the “power” of Torah; the inner

parts of Torah). The School of Hillel, took the Torah more at ‘face value’ (c.f., the

revealed parts of Torah) as a discussion of good and bad, not ‘potential bad.’

Consequently, if the elimination of ‘potential bad’ is beyond reach, it is unwise to

reject activities which contain much good and only potential evil, since profit can be

made from the good. Therefore, it is forbidden to push away any entity or activity

which could be elevated to the side of holiness.

595 Note the explanation that the School of Shammai follow the “potential” and the School of Hillel follow the “actual” (see, at length, Hadran Al Shisha Sidrei Mishnah (Sefer HaSichos 5748, vol. 2, pp. 645ff.)). 596 See Zohar III 245a; Taamei HaMitzvos of the Arizal, Parshas Seitzei; Introduction to Tanya; Iggeres HaKodesh 13; and frequently elsewhere. 597 Note the saying of our Sages, “Rabbi Meir drew conclusions from names” (Yoma 83b; see at length (on the issue of expounding names) Teshuvos U’Biurim, chap. 1, and sources cited there). 598 Moed Katan 5a, and sources cited there. 599 Job 29:3. 600 See Likkutei Torah, Song of Songs 48bf, and frequently elsewhere.

253For this reason, throughout history — when people have been unable to

relate to the sophistication of the School of Shammai, to ascertain their exact

approach which precludes even hidden evil — the law has followed the School of

Hillel, and the rulings of Shammai are of no legal significance. On the occasion

when the School of Shammai formed a majority, “It was as bad for the Jewish

people as the day the Golden Calf was made,” because it caused the outlawing of

objects which could have been won over to the side of holiness. Consequently, the

forces of evil were able to profit.

However, in the messianic era, the law will follow the School of Shammai

since the task of removing evil from the world will be complete, and the Jewish

sages will be capable of the profundity of Shammai601 (and “one can only judge what

his eyes see”), to discern and refrain from potential bad.

This will eventually lead to the elimination of any possibility of sin, through

the outlawing of any activity which contains hidden evil (for hidden evil will remain,

as explained above, chap. 12). Hence, the law will increase in stringencies, since we

will be sufficiently discerning to refrain from any object or activity which has within

it the potential for bad. All of this will be made possible by the introduction of a style

of Torah study for all Jews which inherently transcends any possibility of evil, as the

Midrash promises, “A new Torah will come out from Me.”

An example of a ruling in favour of Shammai in the current era

In connection with Shavuos, the “time of the giving of the Torah” — which

incorporates the “New Torah that will come out from Me” —we also find an instance

where the law favours the School of Shammai, resembling the state of affairs in the

messianic era: 602

At the end of the laws of Shavuos, the Alter Rebbe writes: “On the day

following the festival of Shavuos it is legally forbidden to fast, for in Temple times it

601 Note the statement in Taamei HaMitzvos cited in note 121: “’Both are words of the living God’ — both are the truth on each respective level, but the law fits the time.” 602 As the Alter Rebbe writes in Tanya, chap. 36: “There was already a taste of this at the giving of the Torah.”

14

254was a day of sacrificial offerings. On that day they would offer burnt offerings

which were brought by those attending Temple services for the festivals, which were

not permitted to be offered on the festival itself, for they did not enhance the

enjoyment of the day… Even though this is the opinion of the School of Shammai,

and according to the School of Hillel it is permissible to offer them on the festival

itself, nevertheless, in this matter the School of Hillel followed Shammai and many

Jews copied them, offering their sacrifices after the festival. Thus, the day after the

festival became like a festival itself, when eulogies and fasts are prohibited. So too,

now after the Temple has been destroyed eulogies and fasts are not permitted on this

day.” 603

The following explanation could be argued, regarding the inner

significance604 of the above: The Talmud605 states: “The day before Shavuos is

dangerous (to draw blood)… because… a wind called ‘slaughtered’ came forth, and

if the Jewish people would not have accepted the Torah it would have slaughtered

them to pieces.”606 On this, the Maharsha asks,607 “Surely… it should have been

called ‘slaughterer’ and not ‘slaughtered,’ for it was coming to slaughter others.”

He answers, “That wind was the Satan, the evil inclination, the spirit that came to

slaughter the Jewish people if they did not accept the Torah. But since they accepted

the Torah and were victorious over their evil inclinations the reverse occurred, and

the Jewish people slaughtered the evil inclination.”

It could be argued that this is also the meaning behind the ‘day of slaughter’

(following Shavuos) — the slaughter of the evil inclination. That is to say, on the

“day before Shavuos,” before the Torah was accepted, “a wind came forth” to

slaughter the Jewish people if they did not accept the Torah. On the day after

Shavuos, after they accepted the Torah, the day became “a day of slaughter,” due to

the fact that “the Jewish people slaughtered the evil inclination.”

603 Alter Rebbe’s Shulchan Oruch, Orach Chaim 494:19. 604 Concerning its legal relevance, see, at length, Likkutei Sichos, vol. 28, pp. 24ff., and sources cited there. 605 Shabbos 129b. 606 See Machsis HaShekel to Orach Chaim, end of chap. 468: “You should know that at any time when something occurred to our forefathers, when the time comes round again a fraction of the thing is aroused once again.” 607 Chiddushei Aggados to Sanhedrin 43b.

255The reason why “in this matter the School of Hillel followed Shammai

and many Jews copied them, offering their sacrifices after the festival”, one could

argue, is because the festival itself celebrates the giving of the Torah, including

(concealed within) the “New Torah that will come out from Me.” At this level of

Torah, which transcends any involvement with the world and where the secrets are

revealed, there is no (room and) need to slaughter the evil inclination608 (like the

view of the School of Shammai, whose sharpness of mind precludes the possibility

of even hidden or potential evil). Therefore, it was the day after Shavuos that became

a “day of slaughter.”

Why the slaughter of the Behemoth will be permissible?

In addition to the innovation in the future, that the law will favour the School of

Shammai, there will also be an “innovation in Torah” sanctioning something that is

currently prohibited609 — God will permit the slaughter of the Behemoth with the

fins of the Leviathan.

We discussed earlier the objection cited in the Midrash to this innovation,

“How could that be a kosher form of slaughter? Aren’t we taught in the Mishna,

‘Any person may slaughter, and any [hard, smooth] substance may be used for

slaughter; and slaughter may be done at any time; except that a sickle, saw, teeth, or

nails are prohibited since they are not smooth and cause tearing’?”

In addition to the above, there is a major problem from the law that, “Any

person may slaughter,” for we are speaking of a slaughter which will not be carried

out by a human being, but rather, by the Leviathan fish. The Mishnah clearly states

that,610 “If the knife fell and slaughtered an animal… it is invalid, as the verse

608 As the Alter Rebbe writes, “… sacrifices which were not permitted to be offered on the festival itself for they did not enhance the enjoyment of the day (oichel nefesh)…”. Here the term oichel nefesh (nefesh, meaning ‘soul’) alludes to those matters which are exclusive to the Godly soul, and irrelevant to the refinement of the Animal Soul. 609 As we find in the case of Rabbi Meir, “who pronounced the impure pure and explained why, and the pure impure, explaining why” (Eruvin 13b; see Likkutei Torah end of parshas Tazria). 610 Chullin 31a in Mishna.

15

256implies611, ‘You shall slaughter and eat.’ That is to say, Whatever you slaughter

you may eat.”612

The following explanation could be argued. The slaughter of the Behemoth

with the fins of the Leviathan in the future will be by God.613 That is to say, the fins

of the Leviathan constitute the knife with which God will slaughter the Behemoth.

The implication of the “innovation in Torah” which will occur, is that the laws of

slaughter never discussed such a case (as above, chap. 5), and thus the law that,

“whatever you slaughter you may eat,” was never said in reference to God614, but

only man.

However, based on the saying that, “‘He tells his statues to Jacob…,’615

whatever He does, he tells the Jewish people to do,”616 an explanation is required

why the laws of slaughter are different for God than they are for man?

The following could be argued: The meaning of slaughter617 is to refine and

elevate the animal. This renders it fit to be consumed by a human and to be

incorporated into his flesh and blood, providing him with energy to serve God. Thus,

the idea of slaughter stresses the concept of elevating the world to be holy, leading

up to the perfection of this process — the slaughter of the Evil Inclination (as above,

chap. 12).

611 Deuteronomy 27:7. 612 Cf the question of the Rashash in Vayikra Rabbah ibid. 613 See Bava Basra 75a: “If it were not for God’s help, he would not succeed, as the verse states (Job 40:19), ‘Let him who made him bring near his sword to him’”. Rashi comments: “This is written in reference to animals… so too with the Leviathan” (see Chiddushei Aggados Marahasha ibid.). 614 The commentary Yad Moshe to Vayikra Rabbah ibid. writes: “For God, it is permissible to slaughter even with fins, but for humans who were given the Torah to cleanse their hearts* and to impart to them a feeling of mercy, it is forbidden to use fins, for it causes pain to animals.” However: (a) This answer does not explain why it is necessary to have an innovation in Torah in the future. (b) Primarily: why is this different from all the other mitzvos that God performs, considering that He does not require cleansing etc.? See Responsa of Chasam Sofer, Yoreh Deah 19: “We could also slaughter with an uneven object if one could be sure that it would not cause any damage or tearing, but no person could argue such a case… for who could ascertain such a thing. God, however, when slaughtering himself could say so, with certainty.” This answer also does not explain why it is necessary to have an innovation in Torah in the future. Therefore, it would seem to be the case that the innovation in the laws of slaughter will be that these laws were never said in respect to such a slaughter, as argued above. *As he writes at the beginning: “Mitzvos were only given to the Jewish people in order to ‘cleanse the creatures.’” 615 Psalm 147:19. 616 Shemos Rabbah 30:9. 617 Chullin 30b; see Likkutei Sichos, vol. 19, p. 206, and the sources cited there.

257This explains the distinction between the slaughter of Man and that of

God: Slaughter performed by a human is limited to the extent that it can achieve the

above-mentioned elevation. Consequently, there are many restrictive laws specifying

in exactly which manner it is possible for a person to accomplish this refinement.

This is not the case with slaughter performed by God, for the refinement carried out

by God is totally unlimited and there could be no restrictions. Thus, any form of

slaughter is permissible.618

Connection between all the innovations of the future

The following explanation of the above addition of three cities of refuge, the law

favouring the School of Shammai and the sanction to slaughter the Behemoth could

be argued:

Let us first address the issue discussed in another essay,619 concerning the

concept that Biblical prohibitions will still be applicable in the future era, despite the

fact that the modus operandi in that time will be one of ‘doing good.’ The reason for

this, is because then these prohibitions will be carried out, “in their source above,

which is the forces of the severity of holiness,”620 i.e. severity which transcends

benevolence. This is based on the principle621 that the source of Biblical prohibitions

is higher than that of Biblical commands, rather like the superiority of negative

inferences over positive understanding.622 Thus, these mitzvos are too high to be

performed in a positive fashion, and can only be observed through restraint, i.e.

doing nothing.

On this basis, we can explain the root of the Shammai/Hillel dispute: The

spiritual source of Shammai is in the realm of severity, the severity of holiness which

transcends benevolence. Thus, they perceived things as they exist in their source (in

618 See Likkutei Torah, Shemini 18d: “Currently, this form of slaughter is completely invalid due to the interruption involved… but in the Future Era it must be carried out in this way, for the slaughter serves to elevate the Shor HaBor through the Leviathan which elevates it with his fins. Therefore, there will have to be an interruption, for it is impossible to accomplish all the elevation at once… on one occasion, but there must be an interruption between each chamber. Thus, God will permit this blemish.” 619 See Sefer HaSichos 5751, vol. 1, pp. 305-6; and elsewhere. 620 Tanya, Kuntres Acharon 160a. 621 See Likkutei Torah, Pekudei 3bf; and frequently elsewhere. 622 [E.g. The statement that ‘God cannot be understood’ is more accurate that the statement that ‘He is infinite,’ which is limited to man’s conception of ‘infinity’]

16

258potential), i.e. the severity of holiness which is so high that it can only be

revealed through negative inferences (above the positive comprehension of being

“sharper of mind”), and thus they tended to forbid. In contrast, the School of Hillel,

whose spiritual source was from the realm of benevolence, saw things how they exist

below (in actuality), matters which are capable of being expressed through positive

understanding, and thus they tended to permit.623

Therefore, in the current era, most people are incapable of appreciating the

source of things above in the severity of holiness, like the School of Shammai.

Rather, people tend to see things as they are in actuality, and thus the approach of

Shammai could lead to sin. Consequently, it is of paramount importance to stress

benevolence over severity.

Therefore, the law favours the School of Hillel (benevolence), to the extent

that the view of Shammai is of no legal significance. Thus, on the day that “the vote

for the School of Shammai exceeded that of the School of Hillel” (i.e. severity

exceeded benevolence), our Sages said, “that day… was as bad for the Jewish people

as the day that the golden calf was made” (the source of all sin). This was because

the predominence of severity (Shammai) over benevolence (Hillel) can lead to sin.624

However, with the coming of Moshiach, when the good will be refined from

evil and there will be no risk of actual sin, it will then be possible for every person to

evaluate things as they exist in their spiritual source, in the realm of the severity of

holiness, through negative inferences. Therefore, those things which are currently

permitted in accordance with the view of the School of Hillel will become forbidden

in the messianic era, in accordance with the School of Shammai. In that time the

advantage and perfection of the forces of the severity of holiness will be revealed,

and it will be understood through negative inferences.

On this basis, we can also explain the significance of the cities of refuge and

of murder in the Messianic Era: Murder (the source of all negative things which are

623 This is also alluded to by their names: Shammai — vesham orchosav (“and appraises his way”), to appraise every detail in its source in the realm of severity, which transcends benevolence. Hillel — behilo, meaning shining, as in the phrase, “When his candle shone on my head”, indicating the visualization of every detail as it exist in revealed actuality. 624 See Likkutei Torah, Korach 54c.

259prohibited) alludes to the source of all prohibitions in the realm of the severity of

holiness, above benevolence, the negative inferences. The placing of a murderer in a

city of refuge alludes to the study of Torah (“the words of Torah protect”),

particularly through the revelation of new Torah, “and you will add for yourself

three further cities,” i.e. the secrets of Torah (as above, chap. 12). This brings down

and reveals the source of the prohibitions, the negative inferences, in a manner in

which they can be accommodated inwardly. That is to say, even those lofty things

which defy positive understanding, will be brought down by God so that they can

indeed be understood in a positive manner.625

It could be argued that this concept is stressed practically (in addition to

Torah study), in one area at least, by the sanction to slaughter the Behemoth with the

fins of the Leviathan. Here, even something which can only be understood by

negative inference, and cannot be positively appreciated (which is why it may not be

eaten, because it cannot be internalized) will be brought down and revealed in a

manner of positive understanding (thus becoming edible).

As to why this concept was alluded to by the example of slaughtering the

Behemoth with the fins of the Leviathan — the following could be argued: In texts of

Hasidic thought,626 the difference is explained between the Behemoth and Leviathan

so that they provide lessons in our practical divine service. The Leviathan — which

inhabits the seas, the ‘hidden world’ — alludes to working with the spiritual realm to

‘connect one level to another.’ The Behemoth — which inhabits dry land, the

‘revealed world’ — alludes to divine service which takes place in the physical world.

Each approach possesses an advantage over the other: When working with

the spiritual, one reaches greater heights of conceptualization of the spiritual, but one

fails to bring that revelation down below in a complete manner. When working in the

physical world, the spirituality is revealed below, but in a lesser form. In the future

era, these two advantages will be combined together — and even down below, the

loftiest spiritual lights will be revealed. This is the idea behind the Leviathan

slaughtering and elevating the Behemoth, i.e., the loftiest spiritual lights (Leviathan)

will be revealed below (Behemoth).

625 See also Sefer HaSichos 5751, vol. 1, p. 311-5. 626 See Likkutei Torah, beginning of portion Shemini; and frequently elsewhere.

260

Thus, the slaughter of the Behemoth represents the completion of the

comprehensive task of all our efforts in refining the world. Therefore, it will reveal

the perfection of all our divine service, in that even lofty matters which can only be

understood through negative inference (Leviathan, the ‘hidden world’) will be made

accessible through positive understanding. Consequently, God will sanction the

consumption of the Behemoth which was slaughtered in a non-permissible manner,

through the “New Torah that will come out from Me,” i.e., a lofty comprehension of

Torah, made possible “from Me” that could not be revealed in the current era, except

through negative inferences. “From Me it will come out” — it will come down below

in a manner that is accessible through positive understanding, “and the Jewish

people will be great geniuses, knowing hidden things and grasping a knowledge of

their Creator according to human ability, as the verse implies,627 ‘and the earth (the

revealed world) will be filled with the knowledge of God like water covers the sea

(the hidden world).’”628

627 Isaiah 11:9. 628 Rambam, end, and the conclusion of Mishneh Torah.

261

APPENDIX 2

S C H N E E R S O N , S E F E R H A S I C H O S 5 7 5 2 , V O L U M E ,

2 P P . 4 6 5 - 4 7 5

(From the Sichos of Noach 1987, and Pinchas and the 28th of Nissan 1991 etc.)

The Miniature Temple

‘And it shall be for them a miniature Temple…this is the House of our Rabbi/Leader

who is in Babylon’ — comparable to the synagogue and house of study of the

headquarters of Lubavitch [which is called] in Lubavitch ‘770’

1.

On the verse ‘And I have built for them a miniature sanctuary in the countries where

they have come to’,629 — that even in the Diaspora (‘in the countries where they

have come’), in a place and time of Exile, there is [nevertheless] a ‘miniature

temple’, which is an example of and comparable to ‘the big Temple in Jerusalem’,630

‘second to the Temple’631 –it is explained in the Talmud632 that ‘R. Yitzchak said,

these are the synagogues and study halls that are in Babylon, and R. Elazar said this

is the house of our Rabbi/Leader ( [this is] Rav [according to] Rashi) who is in

Babylon’.

It is possible to say that, R. Yitzchack and R. Elazar are not arguing. This means to

say that even according to the opinion of R. Elazar all the synagogues and houses of

study in Babylon are called ‘miniature temples’, and in addition according to R.

Yitzchak the main and complete ideal [example] of a ‘miniature temple’ was in the

‘House of our Rabbi’:

629 Ezekiel 11:16, 630 Metzudas Dovid on the verse. 631 Targum Jonathan and Rashi on the verse. 632 Megilah 29a.

262The term ‘Our Rabbi’ is [simply] because he teaches Torah to the pupils, and the

‘House of our Rabbi’ is the House where our Rabbi teaches Torah to his pupils. This

‘study hall’, is also consequently the house of prayer [synagogue] (the House where

the Rabbi and the pupils come to pray), since learning and prayer have to be in one

house, as [it says] in continuation of the tractate ‘and we were learning in the

synagogue’.

And the even greater advantage of the ‘house of our Rabbi’ (the synagogue and

house of study) compared to the other synagogues and houses of study is alluded to

by our sages633 [who ask] ‘why is it written “God loves the gates of Zion more than

all the dwellings of Jacob” [and rhetorically answer]: God loves the gates which are

distinguished for Law more than the synagogues and the houses of study…[because]

from the day of the destruction of the Temple the Holy One Blessed be He has no

place in the world except the four cubits of Halacha. ‘So at the time the Temple

stood there …. went out rulings of law from there according to the Sanhedrin, and

amongst them the divine presence surely dwelled, and now that the Temple was

destroyed those four cubits of Halacha [are the only place where the divine presence

dwells. This is]…an established place from which guidance to the people of the city

goes forth’ (and therefore also prayer is made especially in that place) – this is the

idea of ‘the house of our Rabbi’.634

And in keeping with [this] unique advantage of the synagogue and house of study of

the ‘house of our Rabbi’ compared to the other synagogues and study halls of

Babylon, it is [therefore considered] the main ‘miniature temple’ which the Holy

One Blessed be He gave to Israel in the time of Exile in exchange for the big Temple

in Jerusalem.

2.

It is possible to bring a proof for the different levels [that are] within the ‘miniature

temple’ – from [examples of] what is written in the beginning of the tractate (which

compares [and discuses the idea of] the dwelling of the Divine Presence, the

Shechina, in Israel in the time of Exile) ‘in each place that they were exiled the

633 Talmud Berochos 8a. 634 Comparable and analogous to the Sanhedrin –‘the judge who was in those days’, Shoftim 17:9.

263Divine Presence was with them: they were exiled to Egypt and the Divine

Presence was with them…they were exiled to Babylon and the Divine Presence was

with them… ‘Where is it to be found in Babylon?’ Abaye said, ‘In the Synagogue in

Hutzal and in the Synagogue in Shaf v’Yasiv in Nehardea.’ However, he did not

mean that it is found in both places simultaneously. Rather, for some time it was

found in one place, and at another time it was in the other place.

The innovation in the ‘Divine Presence is with them’ (also in Exile) is [that] the

revelation of the Divine Presence [was]…in [a number of ] specific places, just as in

the case of the Tabernacle and Temple’ and from this place [in exile] it is [found] in

those synagogues and houses of study which are called ‘miniature Temples’, as the

tractate continues [to explain].

And accordingly, it is possible to say, that the continuation of the Talmud [which

says] ‘where is it in Babylon…in the Synagogue in Hutzal and in the Synagogue in

Shaf v’Yasiv in Nehardea’ ([two] particular synagogues in Babylon), is speaking of

additional [and particular] revelations of the Divine Presence [which are] in [some

sense of] an even higher form compared to the other [regular] synagogues and study

halls [not mentioned. That is specifically] ‘a place where it is recognised that it [the

divine presence] dwells there,’635) and more than this, that there is a particular, one,

exclusive and unique place that is [the main] substitute for the big Temple in

Jerusalem (‘the place that God chose’636). That there [in this particular synagogue]

the main dwelling and revelation [of the divine presence is manifest]. Therefore [the

Talmud continues,] ‘do not reason [whether the divine presence is in] this or that

synagogue, [either] in Hutzal [or] in the synagogue in Shaf v’Yasiv in Nehardea, but

[the answer] rather [is that] at times it was in this one and at times in that’ [i.e.] in

one particular place [at a time].

And [we can find an allusion to] this idea expressed in the name of the place, ‘in the

Synagogue in Shaf v’Yasiv in Nehardea’ –that [is,] the explanation [and translation]

of ‘Shaf v’Yasiv’ is ‘the temple journeyed and dwelt there’. This means that the

revelation of the Divine Presence that was [originally] in the Temple of Jerusalem

635 Rashi on Ein Ya’akov. 636 Ro’ay 12:5.

264(and not in any other place), travelled and dwelt in a [different but] particular

place in Babylon [which was at the time] a substitute for the big Temple in

Jerusalem.

And from this it is also understood, that with regards to the [idea of the] ‘miniature

Temple’ [which is discussed] in the continuation of the tractate –in addition to the

idea of a ‘miniature Temple’ applied to ‘all the synagogues and study halls in

Babylon’, there is [also the concept of] the main ‘miniature Temple’ which is a

substitute for the big Temple in Jerusalem, [which is none other than] ‘the house of

our Rabbi in Babylon’, [as the verse implies] ‘the temple journeyed and dwelt there’.

3.

And moreover, and this is the main thing, the unique advantage of the ‘miniature

Temple’ of the ‘house of our Rabbi’ [is that its significance] continues [to grow] with

even greater power and greater strength, [as it says] ‘as they are in the future to be

redeemed’, and that then [in the messianic era] (see the continuation of the tractate)

‘in the future the synagogues and study halls of Babylon will be established in the

Land of Israel’:

[This means to say that ] it is only in the time of Exile [that] the dwelling of the

Divine Presence [exists] in all places to which Israel were exiled. [And this was

made possible] through the ‘miniature temples’ [that] were ‘in the lands to which you

go’, which [as mentioned] are an example and model of the dwelling of the Divine

Presence in the Temple of Jerusalem. However, after that [revelation of the divine

presence in exile, there will be a change, as it says] ‘in the future they will be

redeemed’, [and] ‘the revelation of the Divine Presence will return to Jerusalem and

will not remain in the places to which Israel was exiled before’. This means that

there will not be the dwelling of the Divine Presence in a place outside of the Land

[of Israel] as it was in the [the case of the] ‘miniature Temples’. Since the ‘miniature

Temple’ [will be transported to] the main place and it will be established in the Land

of Israel in [or next to] the big Temple in Jerusalem.

And therefore ‘it is said in the Midrash that in the Future to Come, the Temple will

be the size of the Jerusalem of this world… This is because in the future city of

265Jerusalem, all the synagogue buildings that exist in this world, will be joined

together with the Temple’.

And [the proof of] this is hinted at in the verse, ‘and I will bring them to my holy

mountain, and make them joyful in my house of prayer etc, [a house of prayer] for all

peoples’.637 This [reference to] ‘my house of prayer’ is referring to the future Temple

[as it says] ‘in this world, in exile all the peoples call it [my house of prayer]. This

means that all the synagogues in the lands of all the nations will, in the future, be

established so that they are [situated] next to the Temple’.

And according to this, there is additionally an even greater advantage in the

[particular] ‘miniature temples’ [mentioned previously]. This is because in the future

city of Jerusalem, all of the synagogues that ever existed in the world will be joined

together with the Temple’, [as the tractate itself testifies:] ‘it is now in exile…that the

synagogues are [part of] the [actual] physical space of the future Temple’.

It is possible to interpret [and expound this idea in even more detail,] that the joining

of all the synagogues (‘miniature temples’) in all the lands of the nations to the future

Temple will [itself] be according to the different levels between them. That the

special synagogues that had special advantage above and beyond the other

synagogues (just like ‘in the Synagogue in Shaf v’Yasiv in Nehardea’, ‘the house of

our Rabbi in Babylon’) will be closest to the [actual] Temple when they are joined

together. They will be actually joined to the Temple (with no gaps between them),

and through this, they themselves will be [actually] part of the Temple, and [also] all

the other synagogues in the lands of the nations.

4.

And more than this, it is possible to say that the future Temple, which will be built to

perfection, and [is going] to be revealed and come [specifically] from the

Heavens638), will first be revealed in the place to which ‘the temple journeyed and

where it dwelt in the time of exile, [namely] ‘the house of our Rabbi in Babylon’.

And from there it will go to its place in Jerusalem:

637 Isaiah 56:7. 638 Rashi on Succah 41a.

266

The dwelling and revelation of the Divine Presence in the main ‘miniature Temple’

in Babylon (‘the temple journeyed and dwelt there’) will also be [the main place of

revelation, at the time] ‘when they are redeemed’. As it is explained in the

continuation of the tractate that ‘even though they were exiled, the Divine Presence

was with them, as it says ‘then the Lord for God will bring back (ושב) your

captivity’.639 It does not say והשיב but rather ושב , this is to teach us that the Holy One

Blessed be He dwells -- ישב -- with them (‘in your captivity’ means just as in the case

of your captivity) from among the exiles’. This means to say that even in the last

moment of Exile the Divine Presence resided in the place to which Israel was exiled,

‘the temple journeyed and dwelt there’. And it is from there that the Holy One will

return with the Children of Israel to the Temple in Jerusalem to dwell [there] and to

reveal His Divine Presence for all eternity.

And since ‘the Holy One Blessed be He [has and] will dwell with them in the midst

of the exiles’, [this place is none other than] from [within] the ‘miniature temple’

(‘the house of our Rabbi in Babylon’), [the place where] ‘the temple journeyed and

dwelt there’. It is [specifically] in this place [of the miniature temple, where there] is

the beginning and the establishment of the redemption of the Divine Presence. And

the revelation [of the Divine Presence] in its full strength and completeness (and not

only in the way of a ‘miniature Temple’), is the [real] idea of the future Temple, [so

that there should be a complete revelation of the divine presence].

Tackling this from a different perspective: since the returning of the Divine Presence

is from the place where it is found in exile, so too the return of the [actual] future

Temple (the function of which is the dwelling and revelation of Divine Presence) is

from the place where ‘(the temple) journeyed and dwelt there’ in the time of Exile. It

is there [in exile, that it] will first be revealed, and afterwards will be moved to its

place in Jerusalem.640

639 Deuteronomy 30:3. 640 And similarly we find with regard to the Sanhedrin (whose place is connected to the hewn stone that is in the Temple), that ‘to Tiberias (the last place where the Sanhedrin was in the time of Exile) in the future it will return first, and from there be moved to the Temple’ (Maimonides, Laws of the Sanhedrin).

267And it is possible to say, that [this idea] is hinted at in the words of Maimonides

(in the Laws of King Moshiach) [when he writes] ‘and [the Messiah will] build the

Temple in its place’. At first glance: Why is it necessary [for Miamonides] to tell us

that the building of the Temple, is in its place? Furthermore, why doesn’t he explain

where this place is? [For example he could have writen] ‘and [the Messiah will]

build the Temple in Jerusalem’? Therfore, ‘its place’ [or alternatively ‘his place’,

must] also hint641 at the place of the King Moshiach (Melech HaMoshiach) in the

time of Exile (before ‘this is definitely Moshiach’642). This means that [this place]

exists in exile, [and] that he [the Messiah] dwells, there [and plans,] anticipates and

observes the redemption of the Children of Israel, and the Divine Presence with them

in Exile. The King Moshiach will [therefore] build the miniature Temple, that is an

example and foretaste of the Temple in Jerusalem.643 (Just as in the case of‘the

Synagogue in Shaf v’Yasiv in Nehardea’, ‘the temple journeyed and dwelt there’ as a

preparation for the future Temple, [the future Temple and the Divine Presence] will

first be revealed there, and from there will return with the Holy One Blessed be He

and the Children of Israel to Jerusalem.

5.

We can additionally explain the unique quality of the ‘house of our Rabbi in

Babylon’ and its advantage compared to ‘the [other] synagogues and study halls of

Babylon’. It is in addition to the benefit of being the synagogue and study hall of the

house of our Rabbi, also [unique] with regard to [it being] the [main] ‘house of our

641 And it is possible, simply to say, the well known idea, ‘behold this is definitely Moshiach’, since this is known, because this is the place of the Temple. 642 And according to this is made clear the difference between the beginning of the chapter and its end. In the beginning of the chapter is written the law that ‘the King Moshiach …builds the Temple’ simply/literally, which is not the case at its end, for at the conclusion, in explaining how the identity of the King, the Moshiach, ‘the potential Moshiach’, is established, until the ‘definite Moshiach’ [comes], it is written that, ‘if he does this and is successful and builds the Temple in its place’, among his activities in the time of exile will be included also the building of the main miniature Temple in Exile, as a preparation and beginning of the revelation of the future Temple. 643 And it is possible to say about this what is written in the Midrash (Yalkut Shemoni Isaiah, Remez 499), viz., that ‘in the hour that the King Moshiach comes [and] stands on the roof of the Temple, he will listen to them (to Israel), and say, ‘Humble ones the time of your redemption has arrived’. This refers to the roof of the miniature Temple in the Diaspora, and this is why the particular point is tressed that ‘stands of the roof of the Temple’ [indicates] that this ‘roof … is not holy’ (Maimonides, Laws of the Temple Chapter 9:7), [and] that this hints at the Diaspora, in contrast to the holiness the land of Israel, [and that it happens somewhere] that takes the place of the Temple in Jerusalem (‘the Temple journeyed and dwelt there’), because, after the future Temple will be revealed and descend below, there will be no need for Israel to hear ‘the time of your Redemption has arrived’.

268Rabbi’.644 ‘Our Rabbi’ [which means] (simply) [the teacher and mentor] of all of

the Children of Israel, [indeed] the leader of the generation and ‘our Rabbi in

Babylon’, the Rabbi of all the people of the Exile,645 the house of the leader of the

generation who, [as Rashi says], is ‘the leader is everything /the All’ :

The main point regarding the dwelling of the Divine Presence in the [future] Temple

is that [actually the dwelling is] in [the people of] Israel, because of the unique [and

intrinsic] quality of Israel, [as it says,] ‘Israel and the Holy One Blessed Be He are

One’646). [Moreover, the Bible itself attests to this unique quality,] as it is written

‘and make for me a Temple and I will dwell within them.’647 It does not say within it,

but rather within them. The same can be said with regards to the dwelling of the

Divine Presence in the time of Exile (‘in Babylon…in the synagogue etc’, the

‘miniature Temple’), a point expressed at the beginning of the statement, ‘Come and

see how precious Israel is to God, because in every place that Israel was exiled the

Divine Presence was [there] with them’. Furthermore, the revelation of the Divine

Presence in the Temple was [not because the Temple was itself holy, but] because all

of Israel gathered there, as it says, ‘When all Israel come to appear before the Lord

YHVH, your God, in the place the He will chose’.648 The same can be said of the

synagogues and houses of study of more than ten men of Israel, [as the mishnah in

Pirkei Avos states,] ‘When ten eat together the Divine Presence dwells with them’.

And this, [viz., that the gathering together of ten Jews creates a mini dwelling of the

Divine Presence] is also one of the reasons why [all] the synagogues and houses of

study are called ‘miniature temples’ [and not the Temple]. This is because in the

Temple there was the [actual] gathering of all of the Children of Israel, [who together

are] the source of the [Divine Presence, which is also known as the] Congregation of

Israel below. This, however, is not the case with the synagogues and houses of study

which are [spread out] in all the countries of the world and in each city, because

644 And accordingly the language is specific: ‘the house [singular] of our Rabbi, and not the synagogues and study halls of our Rabbi’. 645 To explain: ‘our Rabbi in Babylon’ is Rav (Rashi’s explanation), who is call simply Rav, ‘just as they called Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi ‘Rebbe’ in the Land of Israel, so they called him ‘Rav’, in Babylon’ (the explanation of the Rashbam on Pesachim 119b) – and he is called ‘the head of the order of Babylon’ (Hullin 137b). 646 See Zohar III 73b. 647 Exodus 25:8. 648 Deuteronomy 31:11.

269where [only] ten men of Israel gather, there dwells and is revealed to them only a

part, so to speak, of the Divine Presence.

And according to this it is possible to say that there is a unique advantage to the

‘house of our Rabbi in Babylon’. It is in an established place, the house of the leader

of the generation, [because, as mentioned,] ‘the leader is all’. [This means] that he

[viz., his soul] includes the whole of the generation, [and in him, therefore] there is

the dwelling (and revelation) of the [whole] general aspect of the Divine Presence,

and not just the part of the dwelling and revelation that pertains to ten men of Israel.

It is, therefore, a [much fuller] example, and [it is] comparable to the dwelling and

revelation of the Divine Presence in the [actual] Temple. [As the tractate explains]

‘the temple journeyed and dwelt there’, and from there the dwelling and revelation of

the Divine Presence flows in to all the synagogues and houses of study in the lands

where they are, just as the Temple gave light to the entire world.

And it is possible to say that the house of the leader of the generation, who includes

[in himself] all of the generation, is similar to the ‘fortress-tower’, ‘a hill which all

mouths will turn to [and focus on]’, as our Sages explain649 concerning the Temple.

And moreover, and this is the main point, [concerning] the advantage of the ‘house

of our Rabbi in Babylon’ with regards to the Redemption:

‘Our Rabbi’, [who is] the leader of the generation is also the Moshiach of the

generation, [and] the redeemer of Israel of the generation.650 Just as Moses Our

Rabbi [/teacher was] the first leader, [so too, the messiah is also ‘Our Rabbi’]; ‘the

first redeemer is the last redeemer’. As is known, in every generation there is ‘one

who is fit and righteous enough to be the redeemer, and, when the time arrives, God

will be revealed to him and send him etc’. It is, therefore, for this reason that we can

649 Berochos 30a. 650 To elucidate; within each and every Israelite there is a spark of Moshiach, and we can bring a statement of our Sages to support this point from the verse (Balack 24:17), ‘a star went out from Jacob’, which refers to King Moshiach (Jerusalem Talmud Ta’anis 45), and also to each and everyone of Israel (Jerusalem Talmud Ma’aser Sheni, end of chap.4). Both statements are in fact true, since within each and every Israelite there is a spark of Moshiach, the aspect of the Yechida, a spark that is from the aspect of the general Yechida, which it is the soul of Moshiach (see the Ramaz on Zohar II p. 40b), and since the ‘leader is the all’, he includes all sparks of the Moshiach that are in every Israelite, from the point of view of the particular Yichida. That is to say, his soul is the aspect of the general Yichida, the soul of the Moshiach, and therefore he is the Moshiach of the generation.

270say that he [the Messiah] is the leader of the generation, as the Talmud651 says

concerning R. Yehuda Ha Nasi: ‘Rav said, if he [the Messiah] is from the living, he

is [someone who is like] our Holy Rabbi for example’, [and Rashi comments] ‘and if

Moshiach comes from those living now, he is definitely our Holy Rabbi’ the leader of

the generation.

And from this it is understood that the main point [and purpose] of the ‘house of our

Rabbi in Babylon’ is the redemption from [and of] Babylon. [This is made possible

by] Israel’s innate ability, [whilst carrying out] their general service, to make out of

Babylon (the Diaspora) the Land of Israel, according to the famous statement ‘to

make here (in the Diaspora) the Land of Israel’. This idea comes to a head, and is

made most apparent, by the building of synagogues and study halls (‘miniature

Temples’) in the lands that they [the Jewish people] are in. It is from [and because

of] them, that Holiness flows to all the lands of the nations. This quickens and speeds

up the fulfilment of the verse that ‘in the future the Land of Israel will spread to all

lands’. [So much] 'so that the entire world will be on the level on which the land of

Israel is now. In that [messianic] time the land of Israel will be on the level on which

Jerusalem is now. This is what it means [by saying] that Jerusalem will spread to fill

all the Land of Israel in its entirety’.652 [It is because] the synagogues and study halls

from Babylon [the Diaspora] will be established [in the Land of Israel], and they will

be joined to the Temple.

[Therefore] the principle aim [and main purpose] of ‘the house of our Rabbi in

Babylon’ is the gathering and assembly of all the synagogues and study halls of

Babylon. [This is] so that they can be established in the Land of Israel, together with

the Temple. [Additionally,] ‘this [house of our Rabbi] is not only the main ‘miniature

Temple’ in Babylon, [just as when] ‘the temple journeyed and dwelt there’ but also

[it is] the actual physical place of the future temple’. [It is] where the future temple

will be revealed and from there be taken back to Jerusalem.

6.

651 Sanhedrin 98b with Rashi. 652 Likkutei Torah, Massei 79b.

271And according to this [insight and explanation] it is possible to elucidate the

above [idea] with regards to ‘the house of our Rabbi in Babylon’ in this generation

[which is] the house, synagogue and study hall of his Holiness my father-in-law, the

Previous Rebbe, the leader of the generation.

This can be done by first considering the statement of his Holiness my father-in-law,

the Previous Rebbe, that ‘to ten exiles was Lubavitch exiled’. [First] from [the town

of] Lubavitch, where the revelation of the inner dimension of the Torah as it was

explained in a way of intellect and understanding, ‘spread out’ through the teachings

of the Hasidism of Chabad through the length of several generations. [Then] to

Rostov, from Rostov to Petersburg and from Petersburg it was exiled outside that

country to Latvia, and afterwards to Poland, until the exile of America. [And] in

America itself [it was exiled] to serveral places until [it reached] the established

place of ‘the house of our Rabbi’, his synagogue and study hall, the Headquarters of

Lubavitch during [the] last ten years [of his earthly life, which is considered] a

complete period. [It is significant that he spent ten years in America, since]

‘everything goes according to the life’653, [meaning we can learn something from the

life of a righteous individual]. His Holiness my father-in-law, the leader of the

generation, [stayed in America both] in the life of [of this world and] his life in the

world of Judgment [the hereafter]. Even after his holy passing he did not move from

his place, [he was not buried in Israel or some other holy place]; on the contrary, in a

way of ‘going up in holiness’, ‘adding and going’, [he stayed in America in order to

purify it] until the coming of the righteous redeemer.

And similarly with regards to the Exile of the Children of Israel in general, [it can be

said] that in this generation this is where the majority of the congregations and the

majority of the institutions of the Jewish people [are to be found, namely] in the exile

of America. It is possible that this [fact] is one of the [main] reasons why the leader

of the generation (‘the leader is everything - the all’) also lived and was in the exile

of America for ten years. And [this was his chosen place], from where he worked to

spread the Torah and Judaism and to spread the ‘wellsprings outwards’ to all other

lands where the Children of Israel are found, [mainly] through [the agency of] his

students and emissaries to all corners of the globe.

653 Berochos 12a.

272

Since [it is a principle] that ‘in all places to which Israel was exiled the Divine

Presence was with them’, therefore [this is] also [true] in the last exile, where the

majority of congregations and the majority of the Children of Israel are. Together

with the leader of the generation, who is [also] found in the exile of America, the

Divine Presence was also exiled to the exile of America. And in the exile of America

itself ‘where (in Babylon’) [would the divine presence be? The answer is,] in the

‘miniature Temple’ of the ‘house of our Rabbi’, which is comparable to ‘the

Synagogue in Hutzal and the Synagogue in Shaf v’Yasiv in Nehardea’; [as the

tractate explains,] ‘the temple journeyed and dwelt there’. [This miniature temple

was, therefore,] in place of the Temple which was [originally] in Jerusalem,654 and [it

is] from [the ‘miniature temple in exile’, that] the dwelling of the Divine Presence

flows to all synagogues and all halls of study throughout the world.

And the [deeper] possible reasoning behind this is that because this generation [is]

the last generation of Exile and the first generation of the Redemption, we have

[indeed] finished and completed ‘our service and our work through the length of

Exile,’655 [which is principally] to make the lands of the nations into the Land of

Israel. [So that] in a place that is [spiritually] very low, in the land of the nations,

[namely] the ‘lower hemisphere’656 where the Torah was not given,657 through the

[spiritual] elevation of a very lowly place, there might also be the elevation of all the

other places in the lands of the peoples. This plan is brought about through the

‘house of our Rabbi in Babylon’ in the lower hemisphere, where [its spiritual] light

goes out to all the world. This makes the entire world ([even] reaching to the most

desolate corners of the world) the Land of Israel. This is the idea behind ‘in the

future the Land of Israel will spread to all lands’. And [when it says,] ‘in the future

Jerusalem will spread to encompass the whole of the land of Israel’, [it means that]

all the synagogues and Yeshivas from the entire world will be established there [in

Israel] and will be joined to the Temple, in the True and Complete Redemption

through our righteous Moshiach, the leader of the generation. The [leader of the

654 See HaTommim, Part 2, p. 126: ‘from the day that the Temple and the Holy of Holies was destroyed, and until God has mercy and sends our Righteous Redeemer … we build Jerusalem and the Temple, with the Holy of Holies, here in Lubavitch, which it is our Jerusalem, and the synagogue where the Rebbe prays is our Temple etc’. 655 Tanya chap. 37. 656

The Americas and Australia. 657 See the Igeret Kodesh of the Previous Rebbe Part 2, p. 492.

273generation] is the Moshiach, the redeemer of Israel of the generation (as

explained in part 5). In addition, and this is also the main point, he is the leader of the

teachings of Hasidism,658 which by spreading outwards (‘when your wellsprings are

spread outwards’, until there is nothing outside it, to all corners of the world) this

brings about the coming of the King Moshiach.

And accordingly we can understand the great advantage of the ‘house of our Rabbi’

[which is] the main ‘miniature Temple’ in the last exile. [It is the place to which] ‘the

temple journeyed and where it dwelt,’ and therefore ‘it is the actual place of the

future Temple’. More than this the future Temple will be revealed from there, and

[then] return to Jerusalem (as explained in part 4).

7.

And we can add, that this idea is also alluded to in the name of ‘the house of our

Rabbi’ in our generation:

[Firstly] ‘Both of the names of our Rabbi, [Yoseph Yitzchok], hint at the

Redemption: the first name, Yoseph, refers to ‘And it shall come to pass in that day,

that the Lord shall set his hand again (Yoseph) a second time to recover the remnant

of his people, that shall be left, from Asshur and from Mitzrayim etc, and from the

Islands of the Sea etc, and gather (Osuph) together the dispersed of Judah from the

four corners of the earth’;659 and his second name ,Yitzchok, refers to the laughter

and the happiness of the completion in the True and Complete Redemption through

our righteous Moshiach. As it is written: ‘then every face will be filled with

laughter’.660 ‘Then’ [means] particularly, in the Future to Come, as was said to Isaac

(especially) ‘because you are our father’.661

And the ‘House [number] of our Rabbi is seven hundred and seventy, which is [also]

the name by which ‘the house of our Rabbi’ is called by all of Israel,‘770’. This

number is numerically equivalent to ‘פרצת - the boundary breaker’, [which itself has

messianic significance, as we shall see, as well as] referring to ‘and you shall spread

658 To explain: the teachings of Hasidism are the aspect of the Yechida of Torah (see ‘Schneerson, Menachem M., On the Essence of Chassidus. New York: Kehot Publication Society, (1986)), which is tied up with the aspect of the Yichida of Israel, the soul of our righteous Moshiach. 659 Isaiah 11:11-12. 660 Psalm 126:2. 661 Isaiah 63:16.

274out powerfully westward, eastward, northward and southward’.662 This alludes to

this house whose light goes out to all four directions of the world, in a way of

‘breaking of boundaries’, so that all four directions of the world are elevated to the

level of the Land of Israel, (‘in the future the Land of Israel will spread to all lands’),

including, especially, all synagogues and Yeshivas throughout the world, which will

be established in the land of Israel and joined to the Temple. [This will take place] in

the True and Complete Redemption through our righteous Moshiach about whom it

is said, ‘with what strength פרצת)) you assert (פרץ) yourself’,663 and our Sages

expound:664 ‘This is Moshiach, about whom it says, “the breaker (הפורץ) before

them”’.665

And it is possible to connect these two issues, [namely] the allusion to the content of

the number seven hundred and seventy (‘the house of our Rabbi’) with the (first)

name of our Rabbi, which is hinted at in the verse, ‘the Lord shall set his hand again

(Yoseph) etc’.

The number seven hundred and seventy hints at the completion of the number seven.

[The number] seventy is seven as each one includes in itself ten (the complete

number), and, moreover, seven hundred, as each one includes one hundred (ten

multiplied by ten), until both of them are joined together — seven hundred and

seventy.

And the idea behind this is that the number seven is tied up with, [and representative

of,] the existence of the world, which was created in seven days. [It took] seven days

for the building, the seven [emotional] attributes, which are also connected with the

purification of the world through the service of Israel, who are divided into seven

types. [These] seven levels in the service of God [and] the seven attributes [are like]

the seven branches of the Menorah-Candelabra. Accordingly, this [particular]

arrangement of the number seven, [as it is expressed in the number] seven hundred

and seventy, points to the completion [and fulfilment] of the service of Israel in the

purification of the world through the service and work during the entire length of the

662 Genesis 28:14. 663 Genesis 38:29. 664 Aggadas Bereshis 63. 665 And furthermore, ‘Beis Moshiach,’ the House of Moshiach, is numerically equal to (770) פרצת.

275time of Exile. [After which] they will then be redeemed from the Exile and will

return and come to the Land of Israel.

And [this idea is] alluded to in the language of the verse, which joins the first name

of ‘Our Rabbi’ to the Redemption: ‘And it shall come to pass on that day, that the

Lord shall set his hand again (Yoseph) a second time to recover the remnant of his

people, that shall be left, from Asshur and from Mitzrayim, from Patros and from

Kush and from ‘Elam and from Shin’ar and from Hamat etc’. [The verse firstly talks

about] the redemption of all the Children of Israel from [among] all the seven

nations, and [then] the verse adds, ‘and from the Islands of the Sea’. [These islands

of the Sea] refer to [the Americas and Australia, which are in] the ‘lower

hemisphere’, which are elevated in the elevation of the [lands that are spiritually]

lowest [in relation to the revelation of the Torah on Mount Sinai]. Consequentially

the other lands that are above it, [that is,] all the seven lands, [and] the entire world

[are raised as well].

And it is possible to expound [this idea in even more detail]. The completion of the

number seven [in the formation of] seven hundred and seventy itself alludes to the

fulfilment of the service of Our Rabbi in his entire lifetime. [He lived for] seven

decades, seventy years [in total], (from 1880 to 1950), until the end and completion

of his service in the seventh decade, [which took place] in the lower hemisphere

(from the house the number of which is seven hundred and seventy). This also

includes the continuation of the service in the years after this [viz., his passing],

through [the continuation of his work in] the seventh generation, [as the Midrash

says,] ‘all sevenths are precious’.666 [This means] that through [the previous Rebbe’s

spiritual service] our work and our service throughout the entire length of Exile, in

all the seven lands of the world, has come to completion and immediately and

literally; ‘… the Lord shall set his hand again (Yoseph) etc, to recover the remnant of

his people etc,’ [which takes place] through [the Messiah, of whom it says] ‘with

what strength פרצת)) you assert פרץ) ) yourself’,667 ‘the breaker (הפורץ) before them’.

8.

666 Yayikra Rabba 29:11. 667 Genesis 38:29.

276And all of this is in addition to what has been expressed [concerning Moshiach

and the redemption] in the most recent period [1988-1992]:

That the service of the spreading of the Torah and of Judaism, and of the wellsprings

[of Hasidic teaching] outwards from ‘the house of our Rabbi’ (‘770’), [continues to]

pour out and move ahead with even greater strength and greater power, even after the

last ten years of [the previous Rebbe’s] life, [and even after his life] in the World of

Judgment [the hereafter]. [The period after his passing has been for] more than forty

years (from 1950 to 1990), [a time to understand one’s teacher] in the manner of

‘God giving you a heart to know, and eyes to see, and ears to hear’.668 [Moreover,]

the ‘house of Our Rabbi’ (‘770’) has the aspect of a ‘fortress/tower’, [i.e., the

Temple], ‘a hill towards which all mouths will turn’, for more than fifty years (1940

to 1990) ‘ud Olam’, [different interpretations of Olam mean both fifty years and]

‘forever’.

And this [general] idea [that the main Lubavitch synagogue and Head Quarters are

conceptually associated with the Temple, the Messiah and the messianic era] is

expressed even more clearly when one sees tangibly the continued and increasing

number of the Children of Israel who come to the ‘house of our Rabbi’ (may it be

with even greater strength and greater power!), [as the verse says,] ‘in the

multiplication of the people is the king’s glory’.669 This also includes [the saying,]

‘the Rabbis are called kings’, and particularly the leader [and] prince, the King of the

generation. [Because of this] there needs to be, and it is required [of us], to enlarge

and expand the ‘house of our Rabbi’ still more, [so much so] that this enlargement

and expansion has the character of a breaking of boundaries (‘פרצת’ is numerically

equal to 770), [so that it is] just like the building of a new house.

And according to the above mentioned [it is understood] that, with regards to the

great advantage of ‘the house of Our Rabbi in Babylon’, [it is, not only the place] ‘to

which the temple journeyed and where it dwelt’ [but also] ‘it is the actual place of

the future Temple’. [So much so] that the future Temple will [actually] be revealed

there, and from there return to Jerusalem. [Therefore] it is understood that great is the

merit of each and everyone of Israel who gives of himself and his money (and

668 Tavo 29:3. 669 Proverbs 14:28.

277whoever increase this is praiseworthy) in the building of the ‘house of our Rabbi

in Babylon’, as a preparation for the descent and the revelation of the future Temple,

[may it take place] immediately and now literally!

And in this particular time, in the 90th year [of the Rebbe Menachem Mendel’s life],

the 90th song of Psalms, which is connected to this year, expresses [the above idea]:

it starts with, ‘Lord you have been our dwelling place in all generations’, which

(also) refers to the synagogues and Yeshivas, and the end and conclusion [of the

psalm is,] ‘and let the beauty of the Lord our God be upon us etc, and establish the

work of our hands’: this refers to the dwelling of the Divine Presence in the

Tabernacle and Temple.

And it should be God’s will, that, even before the enlargement and expansion of ‘the

house of our Rabbi in Babylon’, the future Temple should be revealed and descend

from heaven, ‘the Sanctuary, my Lord, that Your hand established’,670 the Third

Temple (which also includes the Tabernacle and the First and Second Temples). The

revelation begins in the ‘house of our Rabbi in Babylon’. It is also a ‘house of three’

— a synagogue (Prayer), a Yeshiva (Torah) and a place of good deeds (acts of

kindness). From there it will return to Jerusalem, together with all the synagogues

and Yeshivas in the whole world, which will be gathered in the Land of Israel and in

Jerusalem, joined to the Temple. Together with all the Children of Israel from all

corners of the globe, as it is written, ‘and I will bring them to my holy mountain, and

make them joyful in my house of prayer…for my house shall be called a house of

prayer for all people’.671 [Additionally] ‘it shall come to pass that the mountain of the

Lord’s House shall be established on the top of the mountains, and shall be exalted

above the hills, and all the nations shall flow to it. And many people shall go and say,

Come and let us go up to the mountain of the Lord, to the House of the God of Jacob,

and He will teach us of his ways, and we will walk in His paths, for out of Zion shall

go forth Torah, and the word of God from Jerusalem’,672 [and this is the main thing]

‘a new Torah will go forth from Me’ immediately and literally now.673

670 Exodus 15:17. 671 Isaiah 56:7. 672 Isaiah 2:2-3. 673 A taste of this is also [experienced] in the time of Exile, in that it is also called the ‘house of our Rabbi’ ‘by all the peoples’, through the continual success in the spreading of the learning and keeping of the commandments that are given to the Children of Noah, as the legal ruling by Maimonides in the Laws of Kings Chap. 8 [makes clear].

278

APPENDIX 3

The Schneerson Dynasty

Baruch – Rebekah

cc. 1790

Shneur Zalman – Sterna ‘Rav Ha Tanya’ of Lyady

1746 –1813

Dov Baer – Sheyne Shalom Shkhna - Deborah Leah Of Lubavitch d 1800 d 1792

1773 – 1827

Jacob Israel Twersky – Deborah Leah Menachem Mendel Schneersohn - Hayyah Mushhka Aaron Alexandrow - Hayyah Sarah

Of Cheikossy d 1876 ‘Tzemach Tzedek’ d 1861

1792 – 1876 1789 – 1866

Baruch Shalom Joseph Isaac – Hannah Yehudah Leib Hayyim Shneur Zalman Israel Noah Samuel - Rebekah

1804 – 1869 of Ovruch of Kopys of Lyady of Nezhin of Lubavitch 1914

1809- 1875 1811 - 1866 1814 –1880 1816 1883 1834 – 1882

Levi Isaac Soloman Shneur Zalman Shalom Dov Baer – Freyda Shemariah Noah Isaac Dov Baer – Deborah Abraham – Jochebed Sterna Sarah – Shalom Dov Baer

Of Kopys of Rochitsa of Bobruisk of Lyady d.1942 1866 - 1920

1830 –1900 1866 – 1920 1845 –1926 1826 – 1910

Baruch Shneur

Nehamah Dinah – Joseph Isaac 1882- 1971 1880 –1950

Levi Isaac – Hannah

1878 – 1944 1879 – 1965

Menachem Mendel - Hayyah Mushka 1902-1994 1988

279

APPENDIX 4

Sefer HaSichos 5750- 1990 Volume 1 …the power and ability that Jews have to crown The One Above a king, comes from this that, the Jews (in their source) are joined up with The One Above, how He is beyond the level of a [mere] ‘king, (even king of Israel or even more so king over all the world) this is because a king is precisely for a people who are separate (Others), and the One Above His Essence and Being are beyond the definitions and limitations of a ‘king’; and he [the Jew] is connected with The One Above alone. And in the words of the well known adage ‘Israel and the Holy One Blessed Be He are One’ (Zohar 3, 63,a) The Jews have the power and ability to tease out the Will and Pleasure from The One Above (His Essence) that He should be a king of the Jews, which are found souls in bodies, down here. And moreover [the desire] to be a King over the whole world. …Jews cause the arousal of [supernal] Pleasure and [the] Will to reign, in His Blessed Essence; [although] that it, itself is higher than the definitions [and limitations] of Existence [or Being] and beyond the differentiation of parts, so much so that He is beyond even a negation of an association with existence and differentiation, [ or the Negative Theology]. Since [a] negation still implies [albeit via its total negation] an association [with] and [limitations of the] parameters of [the] definitions [of existence and contradistinction]…Therefore [in short] this would mean to imply that there is a ‘place’ that is beyond both [the realm of] existence and multiplicity [or differentiation] and equally from negation [of that, i.e.] the negation of existence and differentiation [of the multiple]. An example of this [idea of the unity of the multiple and that which transcends it] can be found in the idea of the Torah and its Commandments: Together with this, that the Torah is divided in different portions, …nevertheless it is One Torah/a singular Torah, (and all the portions are part of One Torah)…The reason for this is – that the Torah is one with The One Above, ‘Torah and the Holy One Blessed Be He are One’, even higher than the definitions of existence and division, and even [beyond the definitions] of Oneness, the negation of existence and division. –Nevertheless, both of these qualities comes together, and are found in Torah, a singular Torah, and a Torah that has many parts… And this is the intention, reason and purpose of all creation- to reveal here, that The One Above is the King, the supervisor and ruler over all of the world, and all of the variety of creatures [therein], [the] revelation of His Blessed Sovereignty and Blessed Oneness in the entire world. Thus, it is therefore understood that it intention of ‘to reign over them’ is not in order to negate and dissolve the existence of the world…but on the contrary – that it is precisely the existence of the world, in all of its detailed creations, as they stay in their same form, that they reveal His Blessed sovereignty and Oneness. …The body of Man (dust of the earth), this part of a Jew that is part of the existence of the world (earth), and his soul, which is higher than [the] existence (of the world), a ‘portion of God from above literally’ (Tanya ch.2); that [about] an Essence [it is

280said] that ‘one touches a portion of it you are touching all of it’ (Kesser Shem Tov Hosophos s.116). In order to connect two things together [body and soul] –it is necessary to employ [a third factor] a higher force, higher than the definitions of the existence (of the body) and higher than the definitions of the soul, which is a ‘portion of God literally’ (which this [soul which is part of God] is [merely] a level and description) –[in truth it does not describe the true nature of its reality, that] it comes from the Essence of the soul, which, is [indistinguishable and] One thing with The One Above [ i.e. the third factor], Israel and the Holy One Blessed Be He are One. …for all Jew, Men, Women and children in the True and Complete Redemption, through our righteous Moshiach, the… Leader that is the aspect of the general Yichida of all the Children of Israel, and through him is revealed all the Yichida’s of all the souls of each and every Jew, with the revelation of the Essence of the soul- which this is the revelation of Israel and The Holy One are all One. pp.6-15 …Happiness, [is] the higher form of repentance, that it is with great joy… [because] Israel and ‘The Holy One Blessed be He are all One’. It is the arousal of God (so to speak) within each and every one of Israel, and within the assembly of Israel… ‘and this is the blessing that Moses blessed,’ beginning with the main [and most important] blessing of the true and complete Redemption, through ‘the first redeemer is the last redeemer’ in a mode of ‘that one will point with ones finger and say ‘this’’ [with] a physical finger. However, the idea [behind it is] and the completion and task now is to see Godliness ‘Behold this is our God’ and in a like fashion, ‘this is our God etc, this that God has promised us’ until the end of the verse ‘we will be glad and rejoice in His salvation’, speedily…the salvation by Atzmus En Sof Blessed Be He. pp.25-26 …it is known the ruling of the Baal Shem Tov that every Jew is precious to The One Above, so to speak like an only child that was born to elderly parents. [like the Baal Shem Tov]… that even though there are many children …each is an Only child of The One Above, His Blessed Essence and Being (Atzmuso & Mahuso)! That it is His Blessed Essence alone that gives him (so to speak)- ‘good doctrine I

gave to you’, (Proverbs 4.2) –‘a portion of God’ a part of the Essence, that [paraphrasing the Baal Shem Tov] through it one touches the whole Essence. p.33 The true and complete Redemption, that then there will be ‘A New Torah come forth from Me’ the ultimate and highest completion of the study of Torah, the highest study of the intellectual faculties (Chabad), and based on and connected with and permeated with Higher Awe and Higher Return, that Higher Return is (mainly) the idea of –toil in the Torah, and this is also in a [state of] great joy. …Yom Kippur is a ‘Once a Year’ [event], it is also in the service from the aspect of Yichida [the] Essence of the Soul- the Oneness of the Jew with The One Above,

281‘Yichida l’Yichidecha’,674 and all these three issues of World, Time and [Individual] Soul: Unique in Time (once a year), Unique in Space in the Holy of Holies, and the Unique Yichida of the Soul, the aspect of the High Priest {and an example of this is with each Jew, in Maimonides ‘not only the tribe of Levi, but each and every individual that gives his spirit etc, this is as holy as the Holy of Holies’ the place that the High priest stands’}...since that ‘Israel and The Holy One Blessed be He are One’, the Oneness [and unity] of the Jews with God that this is higher than the definitions and limitations of time, space and soul, higher even than all places and boundaries, even higher than the boundary of lower and higher. pp.37-38 …the joy of Simchas Torah is because of the connection of ‘Israel and The Holy One ...being One’. That this transcend reason and understanding. As it is understood and says in the Zohar that Simchas Torah is connected with the ‘Crown of Torah’, crown being [a metaphor for that which is] above wisdom and the brain which is found within the skull of the head, an idea which is [metaphorically beyond logic and therefore] very high. And to expound, this engulfs the whole man until [and including] those levels that are the lowest; the ankles of the legs, which they are felt to be the most insensitive [not felt], that this is through the heal of the foot particularly [i.e. dancing on Simchas Torah]. …‘and this is the Blessing that Moses blessed’ until ‘all the signs and wonders etc, that Moses did in [front of] the eyes Israel’, ‘signs and wonders’ that are beyond the nature of the world, and they were revealed openly ‘in the eyes of all of Israel’… from the first verse [said on Smichas Torah] … ‘You have been shown in order to know that the Lord is God, there is none else besides Him’. (Deuteronomy 4.35)…since the God (Tetragramiton) is your God there is nothing else besides Him, that there are two ways of understanding this. In this verse there are two points: [Firstly that]‘You’, [that is] Atzmus En Sof Blessed Be He- the ultimately elevated: [and secondly] together with this ‘shown us to know’, ‘to know’ specifically, as in the mode that is to ‘know’ that ‘God is Elohim’, this means that also within, ‘Elohim’ is the numerical equivalent to ‘The nature’, that it will be clearly revealed that it, [nature] is God, who is beyond Nature, until ‘there is nothing else’. This does not mean, that there is no existence at all, ‘nothing’ but …‘there is none else but Him alone’, that there is an existence of the world, but however, the existence of the world is not alone, since ‘all that exists etc, doesn’t exist except from the true Existence’. The verse ‘You have been shown [alternative: you have become aware] that the Lord is God, there is none else besides Him’. (Deuteronomy 4.35) which we say in reference to the giving of the Torah, that at it is a taste and example of the revelation of the Days of Moshiach, that then the edict will be fulfilled ‘no longer will our master hide from us, and our will behold our master’, as it is explained in Tanya (Ch.36)… …‘You’- His infinite Essence [Atzmus En Sof Blessed Be He]) and its flowing down in the existence of the world, is for the purpose of revealing in the world the true

674 The Yichida is the quintessence of Godly Soul in Man, in the act of union with the divine they join the quintessence of God Atzmus.

282existence, this is, that there is nothing superfluous in the existence of creation, but rather, the revelation of the existence of the creation to its truth and completion, that it will be seen in a clear fashion that the physical being [Ego] is enlivened every moment from the ‘Being and Essence of the Existing Blessed Be He, that His Existence is from it-Self, and…there is nothing else’ …that is revealed the True Existence that of ‘Israel and The Holy One are One’ that all of his existence [even down] to the heal of the foot, is ‘One’ with The Holy One Blessed Be He…and in this it is felt the advantage of Israel and their supremacy over the Torah (that the thought of Israel preceded even the Torah- {Berashis rabbah)…since that Israel are ‘His Twin [counterpart/reflection]’of The Holy One Blessed Be He, so much so that ‘Israel and The Holy One…are One’, One complete existence… …this that it is written ‘Day One’, ‘was because it was that The Holy One…was the Only יחיד in the world, (Rashi on Genesis 1.5) however, its written One אחד and not Only, in order that its is felt that there is an existence of the world, the seven heavens and the earth (7+1=8 = ח ) and the four (ד) [directions], that they are nullified to the One א , the master אלופו of the world… …and the completion of the Torah coming through the ‘new Torah will come form Me, and through this it will also make a ‘new heaven and a new earth’, a revelation of the completion of ‘and these are the generations of the heavens and the earth’, until the completion of the Sabbath day, ‘thus the heaven and earth were finished, and all their array’ throughout the entire year, a year of miracles, an a year of the beginning of ‘the day that is completely Sabbath and rest for life everlasting, speedily and literally now. pp.53-62 …and according to the elevated state of the community (and the individuals unity with it) [will correspondingly reflect] the even greater advantage of the individual by himself, nevertheless, since that the service to make a dwelling place for His Blessedness below in actuality this happens through the service of each and every

individual in his mundane service, with his portion of the world, there is an advantage in this compared to the situation of congregation and unity/oneness that is in a community. [ultimately in an ideal community] the unity/oneness with the congregation, to begin with, its purpose and aim [should be] to give strength to the service and the main mission [of the] individual [and his] purpose in his corner of the earth. That it is in a mode that recognises in it, the advantages of all unique individuals. This means to say, that the unity within the congregation is not [and should not be] in a mode that [firstly and only] recognises the community, and only then perhaps the existence of the individual as an ‘addition/appendage’ to the general community, but quite the contrary. That the oneness and unity with the community should bring to the fore, [and] even propel even more so, the advantages and abilities [and talents] of each individual, who is also part of the community in general. ...only Israel and the Holy One…Alone…the intention behind this is, that this is not only to the generality of Israel in the rank and file of the community, but all individuals are with The Holy One…Alone.

283…and since the plan and intention is to reveal the aspect of Yichida; [not only in the community but] to draw out and reveal [the Yichida] in the service of each and every individual, in their portion of the world… This means that the aspect of the Yichida of the soul should engulf and shine also in the limitations of the world, time and space. It is understood that through the service of the individual in his place, this [individual service] adds an elevation to the aspect of the Yichida as it would in the gathering and unity within the community….and he reveals the inner and main point that transcends them and unites with them- that is the aspect of the Yichida. …There are advantages of the situation of the ‘individual’ –that he is able to reveal his abilities and advantages more by himself, even reaching the aspect of the Yichida, more than … when he is united with a congregation, [his ability to reveal the Yichida diminishes] (even more so if with a ‘multitude of people’) since that the existence of additional people is able to confuse him, which is not the case if he is by himself …and according to this it can be explained why our sages say ‘thus man was created alone’ that this includes not only the difference from all other creatures that where created male and female, but also negates the creation of a multitude of creations add-infinitum - in order to stress the advantage of each and every individual by himself… …the aspect of Noah is an example of, and a taste of, the Future to Come, that since in the Ark Noah had all the wild animals all the domestic animals together, and nevertheless one didn’t harm the other at all, they didn’t kill each other…and thus its fulfilment in the Future to Come, is connected with the revelation of the aspect of the general Yichida, the soul of our righteous Moshiach, that through him it will be made apparent the ‘Only of the world’ throughout the entire world, its possible to say that a taste of this was also in the Ark of Noah… And the command ‘Go out of your land of your birth from the house of your father, and go to the land I will show you’ which was said to Abram in a singular tense, and its possible to say that this was in order to show the great advantage of the individual that through his activities while alone, he made the land of Canaan into ‘the land of Israel’…and in the service of each and everyone of Israel, that needs to go out from their land, the land where they were born, and the house of their fathers. … that they go out on their individual service in their portion of the world, to bring out the Oneness of The Holy One, similar to the activities of Abraham our father, to release/reveal Godliness in the world. p.89-93 (Lech l’cha- ‘go out from you’) from your existence, even your existence of Holiness, and ‘go to the land that I will show you’. p.99 …this that Abraham was able to do throughout the world, to spread Godliness in the world, until that he was able to add to the ‘God of Heaven’, ‘God of the earth’ in such a way that ‘and they called out in the name of God El Olam World’ (Vayika 21.33),… ‘and it does not say “El HaOlam”, “God of the World” but rather “El Olam” “GodWorld” ’ (that the world is One thing with God so to speak) (Likkuettie Torah Tavo 42,4) pp.100-101

284And particularly in this generation- the generation of the foot steps of Moshiach, which comes after the many services (from ‘Lech L’cha etc) with self sacrifice in all generations before this one (also in time of Abraham), which includes the service of ‘Make here the land of Israel’ and now everything is finished, even my father-in-law the Previous Rebbe who said that we’ve finished polishing the buttons, and we are already ‘standing all of us together’ to go to ‘the land which I will show you’ simply, and in that itself, in Jerusalem the Holy city, to the Holy mountain, the Third Temple, until in the Holy of Holies. p.108 A messenger of a man is as him [the sender] literally, just like the one who sent him literally…with regards to the mission of every Jew, all are messengers of The Holy One… p.133 …in your particular place, time and situation, and make sure that in each and every particular place in the world, that there you should clearly hear and see that it is a world (singular tense) of The Holy One…the One God. p.138 …a messenger of The Holy One, and the messenger of a man (the supernal) is like him, until he is like him literally so to speak- he definitely has the power and assistance from The One Above (the Creator of the World and its caretaker) to change the entire world. But The One above has said that it should be a dwelling place in the lower realms (in the definitions of the lower) that it be carried out in the way of nature and in a way that is understood according to the intellect of the lower (even those who aren’t Jewish). p.144 …likewise every messenger-through revealing his ten powers- reveals in himself the ‘Zion’ within his soul, the aspect of ‘Moshiach’ in it, he also reveals the aspect of Zion in his corner of the world, the inner face of the world, in a revealed way, until it is in a way of literally, that then it is made visible with real senses and more than this- the innovation of a dwelling place below is precisely in physicality and stuff of the world, as is known. p.151 … ‘On that day God will be One and His name One’ …not just in the Temple, but also throughout the entire world, that there will also be ‘God is One and His name is One’ in elevation after elevation add infinitum, until the simple Oneness, that engulfs all the many multiples of the emanations of the spiritual worlds, until they make One point with Atzmus En Sof Blessed Be He. p.183 Shechianu…That He has kept us alive and sustains us , and has brought us to this time’ which includes the blessing ‘he has kept us alive’ also to that last moment of exile and that moment the first moment of the Redemption. …In truth the entire life of a Jew is on the level of ‘Sabbath’ … p.197 … ‘On that day god will be One and His name One’ its possible to say that ‘His Name’ refers to Israel, as our sages say ‘in the future the righteous (and all your

285nation are righteous) are called by the name of The One Above, Israel and God are One. p.211 …the ultimate purpose of all things is the Oneness of all Jews and the Oneness of all of the world entirely, and this will become revealed in the completion of the future redemption… ‘and there will be Oneness etc my servant David etc a Shepard over all of them etc, and then the nations will know that I am the Lord etc,’ p.213 And Moshiach will be the Leader of all the world- ‘David my servant will be a prince over them for ever לעולם (also includes the meaning space) p.217 …for you to draw out [and pour out] [the] Blessed Oneness, in the entire world, in such a way as to completely prepare the world for ‘and there will be Oneness etc, and one king over all of them etc, (David King Moshiach) and ‘David my servant will be a prince over them for ever לעולם’ … … the service of ‘realising’ in all the world – in a mode of the spreading out of Torah and Judaism, and the spreading of the wellsprings outwards, the wellsprings of the inner-face of the Torah, of our Rebbes and Leaders, until ‘my servant David Leader’ the Torah [teachings] of Moshiach. pp.222-223 …’And the King supreme King of all Kings The Holy One Blessed Be He, revealed himself to them in His Glory and His Self, and redeemed them’, that His Glory and His Self is simply referring to the Atzmus – higher than the ten sephirot, and even from an infinite amount of spheres, even those that are include in His Blessed Essence (Atzmuso) …and this was revealed down here bellow, in the exodus from Egypt… p.270 …when the true and complete Redemption comes there will be the fulfilment of the study of the Torah [teachings] of Moshiach, from the mouth ’קאי איניש דעתי� דרבי‘of Moshiach, until ‘a new Torah will come from Me’ and the earth will be filled with the knowledge of God as the water covers the ocean, and our eyes will see our teacher, and wake and dance those who sleep in the dust… p.272 ‘A new Torah will go forth from Me’ the completion of the revelation of the inner face of Torah in the true and complete Redemption, through our righteous Moshiach… p.285 Our sages say, that in the Future to Come all the festivals will be nullified, except for Purim, as it says ‘and the days of Purim should not fail from among the Jews, or the memorial of them perish from their seed’ because the fulfilment of the idea of the giving of the Torah (that took place through Purim) it is in a way that the revelation from above does not nullify the existence of the world, but rather, is drawn into and envelops the existence of the world…

286 ‘Purim’ ‘gets its name from the word פור’ and ‘פור means lottery -Goral’ the aspect of lottery in the soul, ‘which reaches higher and higher into Atzmus En Sof …higher and beyond the limitations of transcendent and immanence…and therefore the joy reveals this and is beyond understanding’, ‘until you don’t know’… pp.308-9 ‘you shall command’ (Exodus 27.20) means that it is specifically ‘Moses himself that is the one who is commanding?’ It is known the explanation of this by my Father-in-law…that ‘you’ in the verse refers to the Essence of Moses (his essence and his being) that is higher than the definition and a name (even one as great as the aspect of ‘you’ in Moses) it is tied up with the true ‘You’ that is the ‘Atzmus En Sof Blessed Be He that is [simply] called You’ (that it is specifically about Atzmus that it is possible to say ‘You’ present tense, to the truth of truths’) And the ‘You’ is –‘commanding the Children of Israel’, ‘command’ from the language of צוותא joining and connection of all Jews that are down here bellow, with the ‘You’ of Moses and through him (a joiner that connects) with His Blessed Essence (Atzmuso). p.313 ...It is connected with the revealed of aspect The Holy One Blessed Be He, Godliness as that is compatible with the creation. And the inner face of the Torah, the soul of the Torah, is connected with the hidden aspect of The Holy One Blessed Be He, that is, Godliness that transcends the creation: and within the Yeshivas of Tommchai Temmimim, there is the combination of both together, (via the spark of Moses in every generation, ‘you command’) ‘and I will dwell among them’, the revelation of the hidden aspect of the Torah and the hidden aspect of The Holy One Blessed Be He, within the revealed aspect of the Torah and a revealed aspect of The Holy One Blessed Be He. p.322 ...an eternal redemption that there will not be after it an exile, for ‘an eternal people’ through the fulfilment [and completion] of the ‘eternal Torah’ the revealed Torah and the inner face of Torah in a way that it is ‘One Torah’ through the revelation of the aspect of the Yichida of the Torah. p.329 ...the belief and spreading [of the belief] of the coming of the Moshiach this is seasonal at all times ‘I await for him all day בכל יום that he will come’ and how much more so, in the last generations, after it was already said that ‘all the ends have gone’ (Sanhedrin 97.b) and especially in this generation, that with all the signs of the words of our sages, that it is, the generation of the footsteps [and heals] of Moshiach, the last generation of Exile and the First generation of Redemption, it is particularly important now that we believe and spread the belief in the speedy and immediate coming of Moshiach, literally now. p.366

287…Ztitztits, that through this is revealed the glory of The Holy One Blessed Be He, in the idea of Tzim Tzum contraction, limitation and the concealment itself (and not for the need to reveal), since that the concealment itself …makes a Mitzvah. p.373 …the revelation of the intention behind the Tzim Tzum contraction, limitation and the concealment itself (and not for the need to reveal) is for His Blessed Essence that transcends the aspect of the revelations, since from the point of view of the aspect of revelations, the main issue would be the power of infinite revelation (the name הـוـהـי ), and the contraction that is via the power of limitation (the name אלקים) …is only for the point of revelation, however from the perspective of His Blessed Essence (Atzmuso), which transcends the aspect of ‘revelation’ (even beyond the name הـוـהـ י ) The completion of the infinite power and the completion of the limited are equal. And this revelation takes place through the completion of the service- not only with regards to the manifest potentialities, but rather also with regards to the essence of the soul, that through this is reaches into His Blessed Essence that transcends the aspect of revelations. …these are the transcendent and the inner-imminence, that the union of them together happens through the aspect that is beyond them both, the aspect of the Essence (Atzmus), that transcendent and imminent, revealed and hidden are equal. …this is not [as one assumes] the nullification of the concealment and covering of the world, through which one reveals the intention of the Tzim Tzum, contraction, limitation and the concealment for the sake of the revelation. But rather more [radical] than this, it reveals the intention of the covering and concealment in and of itself, that the existence of the lower, that there is none lower than it, that from it itself is made a dwelling place for His Blessedness. …more than this, that the Exile itself, will become purified, and transform itself to the Redemption, since it will reveal the intention of the Tzim Tzum itself, the fulfilment of the power of limitation, (darkness that is beyond revelation), that means to say, that via the influx [and bringing out] into a state of revelation the Essence (Atzmus) that transcends the limitations of infinite and limited, that both are equal. And through this is made the elevation and completion of the revelation of the infinite power and the limited power, ‘the sun and shield of the Lord ה ـוـהـי your God אלקים’ as it says ‘and the light of the moon (shield אלקים ) will be like that of the sun (sun

ה ـוـהـי ) (Isaiah 30.26) ‘and Lord ה ـוـהـי was to me God אלקים’ (Vayetstay 28.21), that the aspect of ה ـוـהـי now will in the Future to Come [be] comparable to the aspect of ה ـוـהـי and the name ,אלקים will be on an even higher level going up higher and higher add infinitum. pp.374-376 Sefer HaSichos 5750-1990 Volume 2

288…-The issue of pleasure, which is tied up with the aspect of the Yichida, the essence of the soul… …as is known that ‘eleven’ hints and alludes to a level that is beyond the ten sephirot, ‘thou art One’ (The Preface to Tekkuni Zohar {17.a}) and the example in the soul is –the aspect of the Yichida, ‘Yichida L’Yichidechah’ [explain]. (Hashannos on the third day of Succos) …the Essential connection between Israel and the Holy One…is revealed through the service of bellow …as it says, that through ‘the conclusion of work’ it is revealed the ‘first thought’. The aspect of the beginning that precedes the first thought, the source [and root] of Israel in His Essence (the aspect of ‘Thou are One’) as it is drawn out and revealed below in actuality, in such a way that ‘one points out with your finger and say this[!]… …the Essential advantage of Israel that precedes the Torah, the aspect of ‘first thought’. And behold the idea of ‘the conclusion of the work is within the first thought’. (That in the ‘conclusion of the work’ is revealed the aspect of the beginning, that is, its advantage over the precedence of thought that the first thought isn’t even aware of) this is felt particularly with regards to the idea of the Redemption: The time of the Redemption, the ‘end of days’…and…the Redemption itself, is concealed and hidden, that the revelation of the days of Moshiach are at, an even higher level when it is in a state of concealment. In the language of Maimonides that ‘in that time etc…Israel will be great sages and will know hidden things’, and on this account of this also the [actual] time of the redemption is concealed and hidden [i.e. that the redmeption has already secretly taken place]. And more than this- that the concealment of the Redemption is not only in related to created beings, but rather also in relation to the Holy One Blessed Be He, (so to speak)… …this means that the issues of the Redemption are at such a elevated level that even by the Holy One Blessed Be He they are in the aspect of concealed…that are beyond revelation (of speech in the mouth) – similarly to the ‘first though’, ‘first’ that is it precedes and transcends the revelation of the beginnings of thought. …the great advantage of the ideas of the Redemption that are drawn out from a higher level, that it is beyond (not only in the aspect of revelation, the aspect of the concealment that transcends revelation, but also even beyond) the definitions of concealed and revealed, that through this is made a union of concealed and revealed, that also the ideas that are thoroughly concealed will be drawn out and revealed. …Since that the time of the Redemption is concealed and hidden, behold this is related to the segment of time of the future- the redemption of the Future to Come. ‘…that each day that He will come’ that the coming of the Moshiach is on each day literally, and not only in the continuation of the day (the future part of it), but also in a way that ‘not delay, as in a blink of an eye’, in this moment literally – the present moment, until that that moment passes and it becomes a moment of the passed.

289And the reason behind this is in accordance with the idea that the Redemption is at the level that transcends the definitions of concealment and revelation, that through this there is made a union of the concealed and revealed, and the example which concerns the time of the Redemption- which is above the limitations of time, that through this is made the union of the future with the present and the passed. So that the Future Redemption is in the present moment, so much so that it is [and was] the passed moment, therefore the union and the revelation that is beyond [transcendent] (the Future Redemption) in the service of the below [imminent] (the present moment). …making a unification of exile and redemption, that in the time of exile one is in a state and prepared for the Redemption, not only this, but also that the exile is transformed in to redemption, which the letters of the word ‘Gola’ –exile are transformed to be a part of the word ‘Geula’ –redemption (through the insertion of the letter Aleph, the Master (Aloopho) of the world) since that the revelation of the higher level that transcends both exile and redemption, that through it is made a union and moreover the transformation of exile to redemption. And this issue is felt uniquely in this generation and in this our era. This generation is the last generation of Exile –in the time of the end the exile…forty years) that itself signifies the completion of all the issues of the service, even ‘polishing the buttons’, and we are standing prepared (‘standing all of us together’) to greet our righteous Moshiach. pp.395-8 ‘After [the year] 5000 [we go in] to the Sixth Day…since the Days of the Holy One Blessed Be He are a thousand years…the beginning of the 5000 are in the realm of Night and the second part of the of the 5000 [sixth millennium] is the realm of Day’. And if with regards to the Five Thousandth year it is written the that the rising of the sun that it is the morning time of the Redemption- behold even so with regards to the year 5750, that this time is (not only the morning, but also) it has already passed half the day (of the sixth millennium) and since it is so, it is obvious that it necessitates the coming of the True and Complete Redemption, immediately and now literally, and with the ultimate zealousness ‘not delay, even a blink of an eye’. …And according to what has been said above, that we find ourselves literally close to the time of the True and Complete Redemption- we must add with even more strength and energy in the being aware, of the redemption, in a way that the awareness of the redemption effects a change in the present, that in the end of Exile we find ourselves already prepared and suitable for the True and Complete Redemption. …and in order to bring the Redemption; Increase in the study of the inner dimensions of Torah and the spreading of the wellsprings outwards- that through this the master will come that is King Moshiach. p.402-3 …Signs in [the writings of] our sages, that this is the generation of the footsteps of Moshiach, the last generation of exile and any moment (ot ot kumt Moshiach) Moshiach will be here, the first generation of redemption - p.407

290…that through the leaving, and jumping out of all of ones existence (from every aspect of the seven emotions each one as they are included in the seven emotions) [in]to the purity, and to the making holy, in the Holiness of the Holy One Blessed Be He, one is made prepared and able to receive the Torah from New, which makes the unification of the congregation of Israel with the Holy One Blessed Be He an incomparable and unsurpassed elevation. And moreover and mainly…there is made the preparation to the innovation of the Giving of the Torah of the Future to Come, ‘a New Torah will come from Me’, ‘from Me’ especially, as in that which is written ‘since all know Me’ that it will be revealed the completion of the unification of Israel and the Holy One, that they are One literally (see Zohar Chadash 73.a). p.419 …in the Third Temple, together with the completion of the Oneness and union of the Holy One Blessed Be He and the Congregation of Israel (Zohar Chadash 97, the end of side A and on…) since that ‘the days of the Moshiach are a wedding’, ‘on the day of the wedding; this is the Giving of the Torah and on the day of the gladdening of heart; this is the building of the Temple that its building should be speedily and in our days’. (Mishna Tynis) p.453 …and the fulfilment of this ‘a congregation of righteousness (‘and your nation are all righteous’{Isaiah 60.21}) pleasure to them and pleasure to the world (Sanhedrin 61.b {end}) until the pleasure which is most important – as it was then, that ‘in the merit of the righteous women that were in that generation that were redeemed Israel from Egypt’ (Sotah 11.b). So it will be with us, that in the merit of the righteous women of our generation (which is a reincarnation of the generation that went out of Egypt) will bring the True and Complete Redemption immediately now literally. That then it will also be completed the ‘education’, [the completeion] of our work and service in general from all the length of Exile, as it known that the keeping of the commandments in the time of Exile it is the idea of education (as it says {Jeremiah 31.20} ‘set up way marks for thyself, make thee signposts’) for the fulfilment of the commandments in the Future to Come, the fulfilment of ‘like mitzvoth according to Your [your] will’, and there will also be the completion of the learning of the Torah, until the ‘New Torah will come from Me’ (Isaiah 51.4) and ‘no longer will a person teach his neighbour…for all will know Me’, (Jeremiah 31.32) ‘since the earth will be filled with the knowledge of God as the waters cover the ocean bed.’ (Isaiah 11.9) p.459 …we see in literal actuality the fulfilment of the words of the Rashbi, ‘and when in the future they are redeemed the Divine Presences will be with them’ Moses and Aaron will be with them, and the Rashbi will be with them, and the Previous Rebbe the leader of the generation will be with them…in the midst of the ultimate joy, happiness and pleasure, until is drawn out the joy and pleasure of The Sabbath Day, which this is the meal of the Leviathan and the Behemoth in the Future to Come. p.462 …And the [unique] innovation of the Giving of the Torah is the drawing out of Holiness into the world was done in an inner way, that since there was nullified the

291decree, [thus] higher descended to the lower, and the lower ascended to the higher, the ‘object’… of the world was transformed into ‘object’ of Holiness’. In a slightly different vein; the innovation of the Giving of the Torah- …it gives power to elevate these worldly matters, until the entire world is made [into] the ‘individual domain’ for the Yichido [Only] of the world. (See Tanya 32 end) p.495 …this has to be in the service of man – and its example is: the fire of the animal spirit needs to be made use of and placed on ‘on the alter’ to the love of God…and necessitates the making of… ‘a miniature Temple’ an example of the Temple where sacrifices were brought… …And all of this happens through the service of Israel – ‘All of you are sons of the Most High’ (Psalms 82.6) that therefore, also when they are situated in [this] the lower world they are ‘sons of the Most High’. Not only this but also they make from the world (‘market place’) a private domain, for the Yichido of the world, and in the private domain itself- a house to the Holy One Blessed Be He, a dwelling place for His [very] Blessedness in the lower realms…. p.496 However, at the moment of the Giving of the Torah itself where was mainly the revelation and the potentiality from above of ‘and I am the Beginning as it says (Yitro 19.20) and the Lord went down on mount Sinai’ (Tanchuma Va’Ayra 15…), and then there is ‘the section of the giving [of the Torah]’ and it is not one mention of the opposite etc…: after the Giving of the Torah there was the beginnings of the service of the Jews from themselves, [their] own power, so therefore from then on was the preparation for the [building of the] Tabernacle, through the service of the Israelites of ‘and make for me a dwelling’. p.511 ‘Shelach’- go forth- also hints to the mission of each and everyone of Israel, that their souls (which is literally a apart of God above) is sent out and goes down to this world and dresses in a body in order to fulfil the mission of the Holy One…to make a dwelling place for His Blessedness in the lower realms’ and this is the reason and idea behind the conquering and going into the land …to make out of the land of Canaan (the lowest of lowly places) the land of Israel, a ‘land that wants to do the will of its inhabitances’ (Beraisis Rabbah paragraph 5.8) a land that is permeated with Holiness and Judaism (‘a Jewish Land’) Torah and Mitzvoth. p.517 Since that the mission is that the Man will make a dwelling place for His Blessedness below, it is necessary that the service be done particularly by himself… ‘according to your understanding, I do not command you’, behold, that the service is from the will and understanding of Man, with free choice and in freedom. …It is expounded in the Midrash (Tanchumah,) ‘that the want to give the Torah was in order to nullify the first decree (this is to say, not only that the Higher and the Lower should be mutually exclusive {that there should not be a joining of the two}, but rather, that there was a decree a [Royal] Decree of The King that ‘Decreed and said…Don not go down…Don not go up’.) and say to the Lower go up to the Higher and the Higher to go down to the Lower… ‘the Lord came down to Mt Sinai’ … ‘and Moses went up to God’…even though the service was started by the Higher going down to the Lower, nevertheless, the intention was that afterwards there would be the

292service of the Lower from themselves, that ‘the Lower go up to the Higher’ and after this service of the Lower, from themselves (arousal from below) makes the flow from above (arousal from above) in an even higher way than the divine influx from above that was before the service of the Lower – Since the divine intention was that there should be a dwelling place in the Lower and particularly (in the situation of the Lower). And accordingly the main and complete service from themselves it is felt that there is space to error…and at first the question is even stronger: How is it possible that the time of the ultimate elevation that Moses Our Teacher in the receiving of the Torah- that there was room to error, as it says ‘and the people saw that Moses had delayed in descending the mountain…’ so much so, that outcome from this was that there was the smashing of the Tablets [of stone]. …this was in order that the innovation in the service of Israel from themselves could be felt, that even though there was space for error, [the idea was that they do] not to make a mistake (but only that in actuality they mixed with the side of things that were not good etc) …[however,] together with this, there was also the advantage of Return (the advantage of itself, which did not necessarily require the descent through sin, [but] through the [service of] ‘in the future the righteous repent’ (Zohar Chadash 153.b) This was felt with the First Tablets – a situation that gave the potential for error in and of itself, (which even includes in it the space to error, or not to error) that is to say, that all the particulars of the 120 days of the Giving of the Torah (a multiple of three sets of forty days) where themselves included in the first forty days as they were in there completion in the ‘the First where His will’ (Rashi Ki Tasseh 32.a and Ekev 9.18) pp.518-20 …this was only in order that it be felt the advantage of the service from themselves ‘send out according to your wisdom’ and in a way that there should not be in actuality any issues of not good, God forbid, just as in the situation of the first forty days of the first Tablets ‘the first were His will’…and according to the above explanation the connection of the Parasha of Shelach to the Giving of the Torah of the First Tablets, it is understood that in this time the mission of each and everyone of Israel (‘send for your self’) it is tied up with and is connected to the Giving of the Torah of the first Tablets. That is to say that, to increase in even greater strength and power in the study of the Torah, and that through this it brings the coming of our righteous Moshiach immediately now… ‘and God spoke to Moses saying, send for yourself’ this applies to the aspect of Moses that in each and everyone of Israel, which the idea of Moses is the Torah … p.525 …in the name ‘Korach’, it is understood that there is an advantage and teaching in ‘Korach’ himself. This can be understood by first prefacing a wondrous idea found in Maimonides which is connected to this Parasha… ‘not only the Tribe of Levi alone, but each and every person etc…that gives his spirit over to Him and his understanding and emotions, to separate himself and stand before God to serve and worship Him etc…behold this is as holy as the Holy of Holies, and God will be their portion and

293inheritance forever and ever, and they will merit in this world all that which they require just as the Priests and Levites.’ …the essence of what Maimonides wrote was ‘…all men and women who give themselves to Him etc…behold this is as holy as the Holy of Holies’, which describes that which was given to and implies the status of the High Priest (this means that every Jew cane reach the level of Levite…and even higher even reaching the level of the High Priest) this is not a contradiction to [question and problem of] …Korach and his congregation which… ‘want to be Priests too’ (Korach 16.10) ‘requesting [desiring] to be High Priests’ (Rashi Korach 16.6) ‘…there is only One God, One Ark, One Torah, One Alter, and [only] One High Priest…’)… Korach and his congregation wanted to be High Priest in a literal sense, (and go into the Holy of Holies with the incense offerings) which is not the case with Maimonides who says ‘is as holy as the Holy of Holies’ [that is] in the spiritual service of the heart and spirit. [even though the whole of Israel can be on the same spiritual level as a High Priest there is only one actual High Priest, if we translate or exchange High Priest for Messiah then even though every Jew can be or is? on the level of the messiah there is only one actual Messiah]. (…this verse [Isaiah 11.2] also goes on Moshiach) ‘and you shall be to me a kingdom of Priests and a Holy Nation’ (Yitro 19.6) here in this verse ‘Priests’ really means ‘High Priests’ (as it explained in the commentaries {Biur Haytiv and Agadas Bereshis Perek 69.}) and therefore it is a desire and yearning of every Jew to be at the level of High Priest. … …however it is only through being subservient to the High Priest does every Jew become ‘as holy as the Holy of Holies’… pp.528-530 …And furthermore: from Joseph stems the idea of kingship in Jews (its is even possible to say therefore, that he was the first king) king of the house of Joseph, even, Moshiach ben Yoseph, and it is even possible to say that [the kingdom of Joseph is superior to] even the kingdom of the House of David (the main Kingdom) with Moshiach ben Dovid. As it is explained elsewhere (Ohr Ha Torah the beginning of Parasha Vaigash and Rashi’s commentary), that in this time Joseph is superior to Judah, and Judah receives from Joseph (similarly to the difference between Learning and Action, that now Learning is greater because it leads to Action –Talmud Kedushin 40.b) Even also including the idea of kingship. And through this it is revealed in the Future to Come the advantage of Judah (beyond Joseph) ‘and David my servant will be the leader over all of them forever’ (Ezekiel 37.26) [that is Action over Learning]. p.557 …and it is explained in commentaries on the Zohar that since ‘Moshiach ben Dovid will enliven the Moshiach ben Yoseph to take from Joseph and give to David so much so that he has twice as much’ … ‘the days of the kingly days shall be added to’… ‘the days of the days of the King Moshiach will be added to…’ and in the coming of our righteous Moshiach (Moshiach son of David) in the Future Redemption, there will be completion (the life force) also in Joseph and in Moshiach the son of Joseph. …

294‘Joseph’ in our generation is His Holiness my father-in-law Admor the Leader of the generation. … ‘I will show you wonders’, the great miracles that He alone knows* (Psalms 136.4) (those that only God recognises as miracles) and also including ‘a New Torah will go forth from Me!’ and the fulfilment of the Commandments ‘mitzvoth according to Your Will’, as they will be revealed in the Future to Come. pp.559-61 The greatness of Zeddakah is that it brings close the Redemption and speeds up the Redemption. And not only [does it] ‘brings it closer’ but rather that immediately and literally now the True and Complete Redemption will actually come through David the King Moshiach (together with ‘Pinchas who is Elijah’ to announce the Redemption) In the midst of joy and a glad heart, immediately and literally now. p.583 …Tifferes (which corresponds to the Third day) it make One Chessed (the First Day) and Gevurah (the Second Day) and therefore it is ‘doubled there; it was good’…it is the advantage of the Third which has the ability to make peace in a place of division, that through it comes to a special pinnacle of Oneness, even with regards to the Oneness of ‘Day One’…the way it is when ‘Day One’ is on its own, even though there is this Oneness, it is a Oneness that comes from there not being any other existence, and therefore this is still not a complete Oneness,…[however] the Third [Three] is such that it has in it itself it includes the division (that was created on the Second Day) it becomes Oneness, that is when it is a true Oneness. p.585 …the innovation of the Third Temple, that there will be in it the joining and union of the divine influx from above to below and the elevation from below to above, ‘with two hands’ (of the right and of the left, Chessed and Gevurah, drawing down and that of elevation) – that since there will be there the revelation of the Essence/Atzmus (compared to Jacob, Tifferes, that goes up to the Keter/Crown) that is beyond/above all forms and limitations of Above and Below, and joins them together… p.602 …the descent and separation [in time] of the Destruction of the Temple was in order for the rebuilding of the New. From the arousal and addition in the your service with even greater strength and power in a mode of innovation. Starting from the innovation in the learning of the Torah, ‘in each day it should be in your eyes as new’, this also includes the accomplishment (in the study of the Torah) of the ability to innovate within the Torah, that through this one speeds and quickens even more the fulfilment of the statement ‘a New Torah will go forth from Me! (and also the innovation in the fulfilment of the commandments of doing them ‘like the commandments of Your Will’.) p.603 ‘All of these consolations (of Nachmu Nachamu …) the future to the Days of Moshiach’ (Radak) Moshiach is the aspect of the General Yichida, which is tied up with the Yichida L’yechicha. His Blessed Essence, which it includes in itself the ultimate and complete fulfilment and all ideas, of the completion of beyond reason

295and understanding, -as is known that Moshiach will come b’hessech ha daas, when the mind is otherwise occupied, as it says ‘I have found my servant David’. And simultaneously therefore, the completion of reason and understanding, as it is known that Moshiach will be a teacher (in addition to being a King) and he will teach all the people entirely, the Torah [teachings] of Moshiach. And therefore we must as a preparation to the acceptance Moshiach, learn (reason and understanding) the wellsprings, the Torah [teachings] of Moshiach, ‘spread your wellsprings outside’. p.613 ‘and [yet he says] not the tribe of Levite alone, but also each and every person…who gives his spirit over to Him, and to understand and know Him, and to separate oneself and stand before God and to serve Him…behold this is as holy as the Holy of Holies, and God will be their portion and their inheritance etc’. …From one point the argument of separation- ‘at that time God separated the tribe of Levite’, the separation from all of Israel, as it continues in the scripture, ‘because of this the Levite will not have a portion of the Land or inheritance of his brother, since God will be his inheritance’ since they have been separated from all the Children of Israel ‘they stand before God and serve Him’, and the Ark (in which the Tablet of Stone and the [original] Torah) it was holier and all of the Tabernacle. p.618 …And we find that, the separation of the tribe of Levi is connected to the service of the Temple [and Tabernacle], until the separation of the High Priest that he is compared to the Holy of Holies in the Tabernacle, this is in order to draw out and reveal holiness (of the Holy) until the Holy of Holies in [and throughout] the entire world, this means that the entire world is elevated and included in the aspect of Holy of Holies, the singular point of ‘One’ in space (likewise with time, ‘Once a year’) through the aspect of the ‘One’ of the soul (the aspect of the High Priest, and its example in each and everyone of Israel, ‘every person etc behold this is as holy as the Holy of Holies’) the aspect of the Yichida, that is called ‘One/Once’, ‘Yichida l’yichidecha’ that through this the entire world is made into a dwelling place for His Blessed Essence… p.620 …I will show you miracles, and furthermore-) ‘I will show you wonders’ that the miracles and wonders will be in a revealed fashion, that one will see them with physical eyes (I will show you). With the most important miracle- ‘just as in the days of your going out of Egypt I will show you wonders’ the True and Complete Redemption through our righteous Moshiach… And especially when there has been fulfilled the signs of our sages [that Redemption is at hand] also including the sign that it states in Yalkut Shemoni (that we have mentions countless times of late) ‘the year that the King the Moshiach is revealed, all the kings of the nations will come and war with each other etc, the King of Persia will war with the king of the Arabia and he will go to Rome to seek counsel from them etc, and all the nations will be fearful and petrified etc, and He will say to them (God to Israel) my children do not be afraid, all that I do I do only for your sake etc, do not fear for the time of your Redemption has arrived etc {and furthermore it continues in the Yalkut} in the hour that the King Moshiach come and stands on the roof of the

296Temple and he will speak unto them to Israel and say humble ones the time of your redemption has arrived’. p.692 Sefer HaSichos 5751-1991 Volume 1 …Menachem Mendel, a name of our righteous Moshiach… It is known that the Leader of the generation is the aspect of the general Yichida for that generation, and its possible to say through him, it is possible to provide power to every Jew, and to reveal his own Yichida in his soul until it reaches the physical body and his portion of the world…and moreover, the revelation of the general Yichida of all the generations- our righteous Moshiach, the Leader of all Leaders…until the revelation of ‘Yichida l’Yichidecha’, your own Yichida, a revelation of His Blessed Essence in the dwelling place for His Blessedness in the lower realms. pp.14-15 ‘The Lord God who gathers the outcasts of Israel says, Yet I will gather others to him, beside those of him that are already gathered.’ (Isaiah 56.8)…the explanation of ‘besides those by him that are already gathered’ a gathering after a gathering – it is possible to say that, in addition to the general gathering of the whole of Israel, there will also be a gathering of all of the individuals in and of themselves, as it says ‘you shall be gathered up one by one, oh Children of Israel’ (Isaiah 27.12) …that this gathering of the individuals is by The Holy One Blessed be He Himself (b’Atzmo)… ‘He Himself…will catch them in his hands literally every man from his place’ (Rashi Nizavim 30.3), each and every individual in his place. pp.18-19 …the reason why fasts will be transformed [to feast days/festivities] in the Days of Moshiach is hinted to in the word ‘Gedalyahu- גדליהו’ (Jeremiah 41.1) that it is also ‘Great God יה-גדל ’, the greatness of The Holy One Blessed be He which is connected with the Redemption through our righteous Moshiach, as it is written, ‘Great is God and much praised, in the city of our God,’ (psalms 48.2) ‘In the Future to Come when the city is built it will be for the greatness and praise [of God] and ‘in the city of God’ itself in the ‘Holy mountain’ in the mountain of the House, in the Third Temple,

297that there will be revealed there the greatness of The Holy One Blessed be He, in ultimate completion. p.23 …The Torah is eternal until the end of all the generations: ‘and this is the blessing that Moses blessed etc, to all the Children of Israel’, that it should be that every Jew and all Jews should come upon all the blessings, also including the main blessing- the true and complete redemption through our righteous Moshiach ‘the first redeemer is the last redeemer’… p.34 May it be God’s Will – and this is the essential point- that each and every one of us should become a ‘shaliach’ (a messenger) to inform oneself, one’s family, and all the Jews around him or her that: “Here he [Moshiach] comes” (Song of Songs 2.8) and “Behold, this is our God… this is the Lord for whom we hoped!. (Isaiah 25.9) (Note that the word ‘this’ [indicating a clear recognition] is mentioned twice.) and “Behold David the Anointed King” {Moshiach} [is here] –therefore Elijah the Prophet already appeared a day earlier in Tiberius to announce the arrival of our righteous Moshiach. It may be suggested that, since Moshiach can come any day –“I await his coming every day” – and since Elijah the Prophet must announce Moshiach’s arrival the day before, that therefore Elijah the Prophet actually comes every day to Tiberius and announces the coming of Moshiach. The announcement is directed particularly to those who put themselves into a position of “I await his coming every day”, even though (as is the custom of Chabad) they do not actually articulate this verbally, but only think about it. [The announcement is made specifically to us] when we recite [this year], from the well-known Psalm, the verse: ‘I have found My servant David, I have anointed him with My holy oil.” (Psalms 89.21) …Added emphasis should be placed on all of the above this year, for two reasons. First , this year it is customary to recite the Psalm, which makes reference to the coming of Moshiach, when it states: ‘‘I have found My servant David, I have anointed him with My holy oil.” In addition, this year we have passed the milestone of forty years since the passing of the Previous Rebbe, at which time “God has given you a heart to know and eyes to see and ears to hear’ (Tavo 29.3)…. (translation from Besuras Hageulo p.6-7) pp.37-38 ‘And the Lord spoke to Moses saying: Speak to Aaron and to his sons, saying, thus shall you bless the children of Israel; say to them: The Lord bless you and guard you. The Lord make His countenance shine upon you and be gracious to you. The Lord turns His countenance toward you and grants you peace. And they shall set My name upon the children of Israel, and I shall bless them. (Number 6.22-27)… ‘and I shall bless them’ (and not just ‘bless them’ on its own, this means that ‘I want to bless them’) that the blessing come from ‘Me - I am אני’ the One Above, the source of all blessings (that ‘blesses them’), that this refers to the ‘Me - I am אני’ –of The One Above which is higher than the source of blessings and higher than names and definitions whatsoever, and the singular mode that can be called ‘Me - I am אני’, the אני and true Ego/existence, His Essence and His Blessed Being.

298In general this is also included in [the word] ‘I AM אנכי’ which has the same meaning and same letters as the word Ani אני but with an additional ‘כ’ which is an anagram [which stands] for crown כתר, which includes all the issues that are found in crown, until crown is together with the true ‘I am אני’ – that is Atik עתיק which is the .עתיקא of the עתיקאpp.39-43 In general with regards to the Future to Come, there is a completion of the union of physicality and spirituality, which also includes the feast of the Future to come, the feast of the Leviathan and the Behemoth a physical mean simply, but together with a more spiritual meal, thus there will be all the combined advantages of both. p.47 … it is specifically the ‘created existence [ego]’ in this physical world which is tied up with ‘True Ego’ (His Blessed Essence and Being) which it is providing and blessing and giving power to the ‘created ego’ the body of a Jew, and this is what will be revealed through the service of Jews with the physical body. p.54 …in the true and complete Redemption… ‘in the beginning God created the heavens and the earth’, -that there will be (in the redemption) a change and innovation in the whole of the action of creation- paralleling the ‘new Torah will go forth from Me’ –in the heaven and the earth and all their hosts, and we can say that this should happen speedily, and literally, imminently, …that this goes on the beginning of the Redemption, that the entire completion and continuation of the entire Redemption – the change and innovation in the process of creation…. pp.60-1 The completion of the Future to Come, that then it will be seen in actuality and revealed that ‘Israel and The Holy One Blessed be He are One’ and it will be seen in reality and revealed that through the service of Israel is made a dwelling place from His Blessedness, until there is no other existence other than Him, ‘there is none other than Him’ even reaching the nullification of ‘nothing else’ since the existence of ‘Israel and the King (are all One) in thier unification … The completion in the study of the Torah in the Future to Come…-‘a new Torah will go forth from Me’, ‘from Me’ specifically, His Blessed Being and His Essence literally, that is beyond compare, with regards to the level of the Torah that ‘opens with ‘In the Beginning’’… …also with regards the issue of Sin, there is an intention and ultimate reason behind it- which is the advantage of return [and repentance], that through it ‘the evil things [premeditated sins] become as though they were merits; (Yoma 86.b) [This means] ‘merits’ literally, and until this category of ‘merits’ are raised even higher than regular ‘merits’ (of the righteous) –within these it is even more obvious to see the advantage of making a dwelling place for His Blessedness in the lower realms, so low that there is none lower. … …‘And the world will be seen anew’ (Berashis Rabbah 30.8) in a way that is even higher than the world as it was in the beginning of creation, which was [only] a taste

299and example of the situation and atmosphere of the Future to Come (a new heaven and a new earth ) {Isaiah 65, 17 + 66.22} …In our times, miracles and wonders are happening throughout the world. These include ‘great wonders’, but where ‘the beneficiary does not recognise the miracle’. Rather, the miracle we experience now include wonders [that are] obvious and revealed to all; they are thus representative of, analogues to and a prelude for the miracles and wonders of the future Redemption, which shall arrive imminently. About this imminent Redemption, it is said ‘Just as in the days of you going out of Egypt, [so too] I will show you wonders’. To illustrate:

a) Several major and powerful empires are undergoing progressive, positive developments and changing for the better in the spheres of goodness, righteousness and justice. These transformations are representative of, analogous to and a prelude for the correction and perfection of the world in the days of Moshiach. Further, by affecting the Jewish people, granting them freedom in all matters associated with Judaism, Torah and Mitzvoth, even permitting the exodus of hundreds of thousands of Jews to freedom [from the Soviet Union] these changes are also representative of, analogous to and a prelude for the ingathering of the exiles, which will transpire in the days of Moshiach.

b) The events which occurred in the Persian Gulf- are among the signs of the Redemption, based on the saying of our sages that when ‘nations provoke one an other…’ it portends to the coming of Moshiach. More specifically, our sages in the Midrash present the following scenario as an indication of the arrival of the Era of Redemption: ‘The king of Persia (obviously referring to the entire geographic area comprising Iraq) will provoke the Arabian king… and all the nations of the world will be in turmoil and terror…and (God) says to them (Israel)…’Do not fear, the time of your Redemption has arrived’ The Midrash continues and concludes: ‘When the King Moshiach comes, he will stand on the roof of the Temple and proclaim to Israel: ‘Humble ones, the time for you Redemption has arrived!’ Ironically, in recent days the (seventy) nations of the world gathered, in a way reminiscent of ‘The nations are in an uproar and the peoples mutter; in order to accuse Israel: ‘You are thieves for having conquered the land of Israel’ They refer not just to Gaza or Samaria, but also (and primarily) to Judea which includes Jerusalem, the capital of the Land of Israel, ‘the city where David encamped’ This accusation comes at a time when everyone knows the refutation, as clearly enunciated by Rashi at the very beginning of the Torah: ‘all of the earth is God’s, he is the one who created it and gave it to whomever was just in His eyes…He gave it to us.’ …one might suggest the following explanation for this paradoxical phenomenon… as mentioned earlier …in the Divinely ordained system for this world, concealment and darkness precede the revelation of light. Thus, we should not be dismayed by the ‘Nations raising an uproar and the peoples muttering’ since it is – as the verse concludes – ‘In vain’ as the Midrash comments ‘all of their uproar is …in vain; because ‘the One who dwells in Heaven will laugh, God will mock them.’ Therefore, the Jewish people stand firm in all matter relating to the integrity of the land of Israel (particularly Jerusalem) knowing that ‘All of the earth is God’s He created it …and give it to us’.

300Moreover, the phenomenon of the ‘nations raising an uproar and the peoples muttering; is, in and of itself, one of the signs of the Redemption, as Rashi observes that; ‘our sages interpreted the entire verse of the ‘nations raising an uproar…’ as a reference to the King Moshiach.’ (translation from Besuras Hageulo Pages 8-11) pp. 72-73 …‘just as in the days of your going out of Egypt I will show you wonders’ precisely in a way of ‘I will show you’, which coincides with the reading of ‘Go out of your [self] land etc, to a land that I will show you ’ (lech l’cha 12.1) and moreover-the Torah portion directly afterwards talks of ‘and God revealed Himself to him’ (VaYerah 18.1) …until the final completion in this ‘and our eyes will see our teacher’ (Isaiah 30.20) in the true and complete Redemption… pp.87-88 … in the Days of Moshiach that then [there] will be fulfilled the edict ‘and the Lord your God will circumcise your heart [singular]’ (Netzuvim 30.6) (which is addition to the service of ‘circumcise the covering of your hearts [plural]’ (Ekev 10.16) that is done now in this time) and from this we arrive at the revelation of ‘and God revealed Himself to him’ – as it explains elsewhere, (Likkutie Sichos Volume 10 p.50 and on) the advantages of the revelation of ‘and God revealed Himself to him’ that was brought about via the circumcision, over and the revelations before…that is a revelation that was beyond what he was able to do by himself. p.94 …‘in that time …the entire world will not toil except to know God exclusively, and thus Israel will be great sages and know the hidden things …and will understand the Creator in line with the abilities of the Man, as it says since the earth will be filled with the knowledge of God as the waters cover the sea.’ p.96 …according to the Midrash, we will specifically say about the Patriarch Isaac, that ‘you are our father’, and thus we will be called the ‘offspring of Isaac’. The reference of the Redemption to Isaac gains added importance because of the connection to my sainted father-in-law, the leader of the generation- whose second name was Isaac, since already in his own life time he declared that all of our service was completed, including the ‘polishing of the buttons’ He therefore directed and empowered us to ‘stand ready all of you’ to greet our righteous Moshiach. How much more so is this true in our own day. The relationship between the future Redemption and Isaac becomes even more significant when we consider the recent developments involving the ‘offspring of Ishmael’ …generally speaking, conflicts among nations, any nation- constitute one of the signs of the Redemption. As our sages said ‘if you see nations provoking one another, anticipate the footsteps of Moshiach’. Involvement of the ‘descendants of Ishmael’ in the conflict magnifies the connection to Moshiach, as specified in Yalkuk Shimoni: ‘The year in which the King Moshiach will be revealed…the king of Persia will be in conflict with the Arabian king…All the nations of the world will be in turmoil and terror’. … and God will say to Israel, ‘My Children do not fear, whatever

301I have done, I have done for your sake…the time for your redemption has arrived’. The Yalkut then concludes: ‘The King Moshiach…will stand on the roof of the Temple and proclaim to Israel: ‘Humble ones, the time of your Redemption has arrives!’ As has been and continues to be proclaimed, especially most recently. (translation from Besuras Hageulo p.12-15) p p.137-139 …and so it should be with us – that all the Children of Israel will go out of Exile, ‘the young and old, your children and your children’s children’ also including the newborns…all of them together (including all of the Children of all the previous generations and ‘wake and dance those who sleep in the dust’) coming (‘with the clouds of heaven’ (Daniel 7.13) to our holy land, and to Jerusalem the Holy city, and the holy mountain, and the Third Temple, and we will merit to hear ‘a new Torah (note: also including a new Torah (new discourse) of the one whose birthday it is on the 20th of Cheshvan, {note2: in addition to the study of the discourse [we have studied] with is so to speak, from him himself, (as if the one who hears was standing next to him’ Jerusalem Talmud Shabbat perek 1, h.2…) and in and through the addition explanation of his offspring particularly my sainted father-in-law the Previous Rebbe the leader of the generation, who ‘filled the space’ of his father.) will go forth from Me,’ immediately now literally. p.139 ‘The Torah was given to make peace in the world’ (Maimonides Hilchos Chanukka at the end), that ‘peace’ is an idea of joining two opposites: Godliness - One and World - two, division, and through the Torah it makes [peace] between them. p.164 … all things should be in a mode of ‘miracles’ that transcend nature, until ‘wonders’ that transcend [even] ‘miracles’, and particularly in terms of the study of Torah, that through it one unifies and unites the intellect of Man with the Wisdom of The Holy One Blessed Be He, in a ‘wondrous unity’ (Tanya ch.5) (‘wonders’), and especially in the study of the inner face of the Torah –[i.e. the] ‘wonders’, which are in the Torah. …and through the spreading of the Torah, which also particularly includes the spreading of the inner dymention of the Torah outwards…through this one makes a purification of the world…as it says that then the nations will be transformed, to speak with a pure tongue, that all will call in the name of God, to serve Him as One,’ ‘and in that time there will be neither famine nor war…’ p.165-166 …with regards to the completion and purification of Esau (Edom) in the Future to Come, until ‘and it will be that God reigns’, ‘and God’s kingdom will reign over all the dwellings of the earth and it will be the Kingdom of God for ever and ever.’ (Targum Unklus on the verse) …and on the verse [‘the chief of Madgiel-Tower’ (Genesis 36.43)]… What has this the last Exile got to do the Esau? ...Rashi answers, ‘Madgiel is Rome’ (Targum Unklus on the verse) …because they [Romans] destroyed the Second Temple, and took the Jews into Exile until Moshiach: this was the fourth Exile, which is the Exile of Edom, the Exile of Rome. … Firstly ‘Rome is from the language to be exulted מותרומהת just like Madgiel which is the language great דולה. Since this is the city that His Blessedness made great מגדיל

302’. A second interpretation is Madgiel is hinting to that which is said ‘and magnified himself above every god’ (Daniel 11.36) … this is said about the kingdom of Rome …we can also say that this, that it states in the continuation of the verse ‘and the city of Iram’, even though it is still part of the kingdom of Rome (Madgiel) nevertheless, it is [the] last part of that Exile- …the Exile of Rome has two levels, which correspond to two particular styles and times of the Rome Exile, firstly Madgiel which is in opposition to Godliness in the time of Exile and ‘Iram’ which is a different time compared to it. ‘why is it called Iram, that it will in the future it will be elevated לערום and be will bring many treasures תסווריות to King Moshiach’ (Bereshish Rabba VaYishlach 83.7). That then it will be the case that Rome will not longer be an adversary to Godliness but on the contrary- through the purification of the kingdom of Rome, it has become a guardian (top p.172) of holiness, through this they Rome have been purified [and revealed] the spark of holiness [treasures] that lay [hidden] in it, therefore through this Rome becomes the exaltedness מותרומתה of holiness. pp.171-172 …The fulfilment and completion of the revelation of His Oneness and His Blessed sovereignty, ‘and God will reign’ the One God, (‘to serve God together אחד’) … not that He is found in some corner of the world, but rather there shouldn’t be a corner of the world that is not, and does not, reveal His Blessed Oneness and Kingship. p.174 … ‘what breach פרצת have you broken פרץ for yourself: therefore his name was called Perez פרץ.’ (Genesis 38.29) ‘Peretz is Moshiach, as it says (Micah 2.13) ‘the breaker is come up before them’ (Agedet Bereishis end of 63) that is made real through הפרץthe service of spreading דהפצת of the wellsprings outwards (which happened through the three fathers of Hassidism) in all the corners of the globe, all four directions of the world, ‘and I will spread you ופרצת out eastwards and northwards westwards and southwards’. p.180 …that also the situation the descent into exile, to such an extent that it is a darkness that is doubled up on itself, so low that there is none lower than it; through the service of the Children of Israel with all their strength, both in Holy matters and also within their purification of the world, until they overcome the limitations of the world העולם (from the language covering העלם- see Likkuttie Torah Shelach 37.4) and the limitations of the exile, that in the midst of the exile draw out and reveal the Master of the world, (nt: which hints to the making Exile into Redemption by the אלופוinsertion of the letter Aleph [as explained]) (not just the Master of the world, but ) also the aspect of Godliness that is beyond the world, and in such a way that continues to transcends additionally elevation after elevation, until drawing out and revealing His Blessed Essence and Being- that through this the lower realm that there is none lower than it, is made into a dwelling place for His Blessedness, a dwelling place for His Essence (Atzmuso). And in the language of the Midrash ‘the tribes were toiling in the selling of Joseph …and The Holy One Blessed Be He (was toiling and) creating the light of the King Moshiach’ –it is possible to say that, in this that it hint [and alludes] o the possibility that the descent into Egypt (which began with Joseph) was (through the giving of a

303reservoir of potential power and) in order to reveal the light of Moshiach, to the birth Peretz, ‘Peretz is Moshiach, as it says (Micah 2.13) ‘the breaker הפרץ is come up before them’ (Agedet Bereishis end of 63). That through him was revealed the additional [abilities] that through them all the boundaries (in ‘our work and toiling all through the time of exile’) are broken, in its ultimate and complete way, in the dwelling place of His Blessed Essence in these Lower realms. p.185-186 …‘these are the generations of Jacob, Joseph’ (Vayeishev 37.2) – the name Joseph, which means ‘increase’, alludes to the increase of the revelation and dissemination of the teaching of Chadad Hassidic philosophy by our Rebbes and leaders, successors of the Alter Rebbe [Rabbi Schneur Zalman of Liadi], until my sainted father-in-law, {Rabbi Joseph Isaac} the leader of the generation; the ‘Joseph’ of the generation. His primary focus was the realisation of the deeper sense of the name ‘Joseph’: ‘may God increase an-other son’ (Genesis 30.24) that is, to take the ‘Other’, the ‘outsider’, and transform him into an insider, a ‘son’. This goal of transforming the ‘outsider’ into an ‘insider’ became even more pronounces when he arrived in this lower hemisphere (analogous to the descent of Joseph into Egypt). His arrival here facilitated the revelation of Hassidic philosophy (along with the dissemination of Torah and Judaism) - to the entire world, even the lowliest- the most spiritually remote regions of the world. In the forty years since his passing, [i.e. in the leadership of the current Rebbe, the Sheliach of the Previous Rebbe] we have experienced an increase in these efforts, an increase which finds expression in the verse, ‘you have broken through a breach’ ‘paratzta alecha paretz’. Our sages teach that after forty years one has the capacity to ‘fathom the mind of one’s teacher’ (Avoda Zarah 5.b) that then one can acquire ‘a heart to know, eyes to see and ears to hear’. (Deuteronomy 29.3) The teaching learned forty years earlier. Similarly, the ‘dissemination of the fountains of Hassidism to the outside’ followed the Biblical description of ‘and you shall spread forth to the west and east, north and south’ (Genesis 28.14) reaching even the most remote corners of the globe, breaking all the barriers. Therefore, as both the forty-year barrier to understanding and barriers to the ‘dissemination of the foundations of Chassidus’ have been breached, we are already prepared for the coming of our righteous Moshiach. Significantly, Moshiach is identified with Peretz, as our sages comment: ‘Peretz is Moshiach, as it says (Micah 2.13) ‘the breaker הפרץ is come up before them’. (Agedet Bereishis end of 63) … On the 19th of Kislev of this year, it will have been 192 years since the liberation [of the Alter Rebbe from prison] of the first 19th of Kislev (5559-5751). The significance of the number 192 is that: …The Hebrew letter for the word 192, בקצ , are derived from the term ‘fixed time’ or ‘cut off’. This implies that the time for the dissemination of the fountains to the farest reaches (as well as the spiritual achievements during this time), which commenced on the 19th of Kislev 192 years ago, has finally reached ‘cut off’ period, at last been completed. Therefore we are ready for the realisation of the promise that when the fountain will be disseminated to the farthest reaches, the master, the King Moshiach will come. p.187-189 (also see Besuras HaGeulo p.18-21) … ‘I have found my servant David and with holy oil I have anointed him’,

304 (note: and the innovation in this issue is that, that even though he is anointed with ‘holy oil’, ((the aspect of Wisdom until the aspect of Holy [or separate] and completely above, the aspect of Keter)) that transcends his existence, behold this permeates and becomes his own existence, ‘anointed him’ especially, that the supernal, going beyond his existence becomes his own existence). Our righteous Moshiach, who is [simply] called ‘Moshiach’ because he is [already] anointed with anointing oil (‘holy oil’) and in addition to Moshiach Ben David, also (and especially) Moshiach Ben David, David King Moshiach. p.190 …the inner [message and] content and the highlighted point of the portion of Vaigash- is that, when a Jew finds himself in a place and situation where he is in need of ‘God of the earth’, [that is] in order to actualise something that is beneficial for the Children of Israel… …in general this is a situation and place of the time of the Exile, that the Children of Israel are in need of the mercy of the kings of the nations in order to continue a Jewish way of life in a way of broadness. -Behold in Truth is that Joseph is ‘God of the earth’ (as he was revealed after ‘Joseph revealed himself to his brothers’), that this refers to all of Israel that are called by the name Joseph. This is also in the time of Exile that a he as a Jew is the boss, in the world, [and has the ability] to make actual, that the behaviour of the world will be as His will. …the experience and joining of every single of Israel (Judah) with The Holy One Blessed Be He… that at all times, and in all places and situations that a Jews moves in, and finds himself, is [only] with the help of The Holy One Blessed Be He, and through this he is able to have an effect on the kings of the world ([so he is] ‘God of the earth’ literally). …[so] that also the place and situation of Exile…is revealed the ‘God of the earth’ that it is Joseph …the power and experience and union with The Holy One Blessed Be He. p.207-8 …it is possible to say that [even]… (in the time and situation of Exile that a Jew becomes a master over all the world). [This is] associated with and is relevant to (not only the time and situation of the exile, that one is able to be in the situation of the land Egypt, in the state of ‘And Jacob lived..’ that is truly living), but also to the Redemption, which means, that the place and situation of ‘and Israel dwelt in the land of Egypt etc, and they grew and multiplied very greatly’, ‘and Jacob lived in the land of Egypt for seventy years’, this is also (and mainly) a preparation for the Redemption… p.210 …they did not lack anything- in the situation that was comparable and a foretaste and example of something that was the opposite of exile, in the time of exile itself. …and it is even more poignant in this generation: Since that this generation is the last generation of Exile and the first generation of the Redemption. It is felt in it, a foretaste of the opposite of the exile, through ‘tasting’ [the redemption] … Since we are close to the end of the exile it is becomes the situation of ‘and Jacob lived in the

305land of Egypt’, and continuing and additionally this [living in exile] brings closer the opposite of the exile with the true and complete Redemption. p.212-213 …‘All the deadlines have past’ (Sanhedrin 97.b) and we have already done repentance (Teshuva) {[it is understood that even] the lightest of repentance, that through this, [an individual] becomes completely righteous. As the law says, with regards to the marrying a woman, that if a man makes [a voe, and] does so on the condition that ‘I am completely righteous’ –this is the law [i.e. it is a valid marriage] (that is, not only applicable to money matters but also) it is the law, with regards to matters of the souls. And in matters of the soul themselves, [with regards] to the entirety of [the] generations that will be born in the future from this shidduch match) that behold it is surely, surely that ‘immediately they will be redeemed’. With regards to this issue of [divine] Mercy…which is tied in (not only to the nullification of the culture of exile, though bringing the Redemption, but) also within the Redemption itself- that the redemption itself is in a manner of mercy, as it is written ‘with great mercies I will gather you’ (Isaiah 54.7). …mercy on each and everyone, in whatever situation and place that they are, will make the gathering of the Children of Israel in a mode of ‘I will gather to him, besides those that have already gathered [to him] (Isaiah 56.8) ‘He Himself…will catch them in his hands literally, every man from his place’ (Rashi Nizavim 30.3), each and every individual in his place. ‘you shall be gathered up one by one, oh Children of Israel’ (Isaiah 27.12)… p.219 …‘for my House is called a House of prayer for all the nations’ (Isaiah 56.7) And it’s possible to say, that this idea is hinted to also in the verse ‘I will gather to him, besides those that have already [been] gathered [to him] (Isaiah 56.8)…that this alludes to the gathering of the sparks of holiness, that are in the entire world, (Babylon). That this includes also the activities of the nations of the world in ‘they have Mitzvoth’ (Sanhedrin 69.a) one of which is the commandment of righteous giving [charity]…until the completion of this, throughout the entire world, that then it will be revealed ‘and it will be that God is the King’. p.221 (…Israel have a spark of the soul of Jacob) is even more poignant with regard to the Redemption: One the prophecies of the Redemption, the commentaries on the Torah write ‘through the star of Jacob’ (Balak 24.17) that this refers to King Moshiach (Jerusalem Talmud Tanyis p.4/h5) and together with this, our sages teach us from this verse that all Jews are compared to ‘stars’. (Jerusalem Talmud Maisser sheni p.4 h6) This is explained in [Kabbalistic] books that the souls of each one of Israel have a spark of the soul of King Moshiach. p.222 ‘Israel’ – is from the language of ‘because you have fought with God and with Man and have overcome’, (Genesis 32.29) more than this ‘Israel’ ישראל are the letters for ‘a head for me’ לי ראש (Torah Ohr Shemos 50.a and on) this is the aspect of ‘the head’, so to speak, of The Holy One Blessed Be He, that ‘they bring into being, the aspect of head in The Holy One Blessed Be He…’ (Likkutie Torah, Shlach 48.b) That they should be above that aspect of the (the mind and skull, wisdom and will) just as

306the part of ‘the body’ of The Holy One Blessed Be He, since their existence is One literally (Israel and The Holy One Blessed Be He are One) with His Blessed Being and Essence (which transcends the head) as in the language of the verse (Job 31.2) ‘a part of God from above’ (and the Alter Rebbe explains) literally’, that ‘the Essence; if you touch a part of it you are touching the whole of it’. p.243 …and in addition and this is the main thing, that through the addition in love of one’s fellow Jew and through the Unity and Oneness between Israel, the culture of Exile will become nullified, (Yoma 9,b) … until it is transformed to good, form exile to redemption Gola to Geula (aleph). p.254 The will of The Holy One Blessed Be He when he gave as an inheritance The Land, so that it should be through the service of Israel from themselves [their own power]…this means that Israel make from the ‘land’ ארץ- from the term ‘lands’ that it should be ‘the land of Israel’ ‘land’ ‘that wants to do the will of its ארציותinhabitants’ (Berashis Rabbah Perek 5, part 8) and that the ‘(the land of) Israel’ which it is recognised the connection to Israel, ‘because you will be (for me) a land of delight’ (Malaki 3.12) …the idea that the Land of Israel in all the world entirely, and in the language of our sages, (P’seekta Rabbati chapter Shabbat and Rosh Ha Shannah) ‘in the future the land of Israel will spread out to all the lands’ since in the whole world completely it will be seen the revelation of the power of the Godly cause in the effect, as it says ‘the glory of God will be revealed and all flesh shall see, etc.’ and moreover that it will be seen that the created existence [Self/Ego] is one with the True Self (see ביאוה"ז Bashalach 42.3) p.276 …since, through the smashing and nullification of the Pharaoh of the Other Side (come unto Pharaoh ) one transforms ‘come unto Pharaoh’ [into a Pharaoh] of Holiness, as it says in the Zohar that the explanation of ‘the house of Pharaoh’ (vaIgash 45.16) ‘the House of Pharaoh and was revealed all the types of lights’, that [he] came to the aspect of Pharaoh of Holiness (Footnote: within this itself the House of Pharaoh …where his Kingship is found in full strength…) that is above all limitations and boundaries. That this is the idea of leaving Egypt in its ultimate completion, that one goes out of all the limitations ( Ha Metzarim) and boundaries (even those) of Holiness, and arriving at ‘the good and wide land’, ‘expanse of God’ and until the Essential expanse of His Blessed Being and Essence’. And according to the well known idea that the exile of Egypt is the source of all other Exiles, and also that the going out of Egypt the source of all the redemptions (including the redemption and latest Exile) it is possible to say according to the above that the Future Redemption, which will come immediately and now literally, on it says (Mika 7.15) ‘just as the days of your going out of Egypt I will show you wonders’. pp.278-279 …‘Joseph’ comes from [and is based] on ‘God added to me another son’ (Genesis 30.24), that also the ‘Other’ will be transformed to be ‘a son’ that through this is

307made the addition (Joseph is from the language of addition) and completion in Holiness. And in more detail: the service of [the Previous Rebbe] …was to transform the ‘Other’ to ‘son’, this was at least [arguably] in connection with the Children of Israel, that through the spreading of Torah and Judaism and the outpouring of the wellsprings outside, also that this happened in a revealed and outward manner. p.283 Sefer HaSichos 5751-1991 Volume 2 …And it should be His will, that the One Above should help every Jew to have ‘eyes to see and (therefore also) ears to hear’ and ‘a heart to know’ (Deuteronomy 29.3) so that, ‘the great trials that your eyes beheld, those great signs and wonders’ (Deuteronomy 29.2), the revealed miracles that happen every day. And particularly as there have passed ‘forty years’ since we are in the dessert of the nations (or exile) in a situation of ‘(forty years) I quarrelled with a generation’ (Psalms 95:10) and we have already come to ‘going into My rest’ (Psalms 95:11), in the Holy Land and Jerusalem, with the ‘Complete’, the ultimate rest, in the true and complete Redemption… As we can see in particular as the Jews that are coming out (like the Exodus from Egypt) from that country [Russia]…and are going to the Holy Land, and there having a connection with Torah and Mitzvoth in actuality, and through helping another Jew in this, so that he himself, and his children can learn Torah and fulfil the Commandments beautifully… And all Jews, ‘our young and our old etc, our boys and girls’ (Exodus 10:9) in all places that they may be, those from that country, and those that find themselves settled in the meantime in other countries, -going to ‘together with the clouds of glory’ (Daniel 7:13 and Sanhedrin 98.a) (in a like fashion to an airoplane but a lot faster) to our Holy Land, in the Holy City of Jerusalem, to the Holy Mountain, to the Third [Holy] Temple. …the Previous Rebbe the Leader of the Generation. And will arise and dance those who sleep in the dust, (Isaiah 10:1) and he and all the children of his House, souls and bodies together, together with all the Jews of all generations… pp.467-69 Since that literally in these day (the end of the month of Nissan, that it is the year of I will show you wonders) ‘all the ends have passed’ (‘the end of days’…) simply literally, and definitely. That any moment speedily and imminently our righteous Messiah will come, and how much more so when one points out with ones finger and says ‘Behold This (King Moshiach) comes’ (Song of Songs 2:8?), that he has already come (passed tense) the moment just before this very moment. …And the Portion of the week- Tazriah Metzora- is felt to be especially relevant to the idea of the Redemption:

308‘Tazriah’ /Conceives – ‘When a woman conceives and gives birth to a son’ –as it is known that birth (‘and gives birth’) alludes to redemption (as it is written ‘travailed Zion, she brought forth her children’ (Isaiah 66:8) and the birth of a male hints to the power and strength (male) of the True and Complete Redemption, an everlasting Redemption that after it there will be no exile (‘a new song’ - male) through our righteous Moshiach, this means that ‘birth to a son’ alludes to ‘the birth (the revelation) of the Messianic soul which it is from an even loftier level… And in even more particularly: ‘a woman [who] conceives’ – refers to the general service of the Congregation of Israel (woman) and in the time of Exile is analogous to a ‘conception’ (‘tazria’), as it is written ‘And I will sow her to me in the earth’ (Hoshea 2:25) ‘In the days to come Jacob shall take root etc’ (Isaiah 26:6); and through the conception of ‘our service and our toil throughout the entire time of Exile’ (Tanya Chap.37) has made ( that at once, without an interruption at all) will grow (‘Israel shall blossom and bud’ {Isaiah 26:6}) the True and Complete Redemption through our righteous Messiah, that after which, there will be no exile- ‘give birth to a son’. And ‘Metzora’ –as it is explained in the Talmud (Sanhedrin 98:b) ‘what is His (the Messiah) name?... the Leper of the House of Rebbe is his name…as it is written (Isaiah 53:4) ‘Surely he has borne our sicknesses and endured our pains; yet we did esteem him as a leper, smitten by God, and afflicted’ ‘how will I recognise him? –He is sitting among the poor lepers and re-bandages them’ (Sanhedrin 98.a), ‘leprous sores, and he also had signs of leprosy, since it is written ‘he was wounded because of our transgressions’ (Isaiah 53:5) and it is written [furthermore] ‘we did esteem his as a leper’. (Rashi on Sanhedrin 98.a ‘Manugim’) And in even more detail- as it is written in the continuation of the verse ‘This shall be the law of the Metzora on the day of his purification’ (Leviticus 14:2), and so that it is customary to call this Parasha by the name ‘Parasha Tohora/Purification’, -since the name ‘Leper’ is a name of Moshiach in the time of Exile, that even though, as he is in and of himself, he is in [a state of] ultimate completion, as it is written (Isaiah 52:13 see the Targum on the verse) ‘Behold my servant shall prosper, he shall be exulted and extolled and be very high’, nevertheless, he himself is suffering and pained from the infliction and pain of Exile: and ‘on the day of his purification’ (‘that it is the curing of the leprosy from the Leper’) this refers to the standing and situation of Moshiach as he is revealed and redeems the Children of Israel in the True and Complete Redemption. p.490-91 …each and everyone of Israel, possesses a spark of the soul of Moshiach, as it is alluded to in the verse (Balak 24:17) ‘a path of the star of Jacob’ that this refers to [and is talking about] David the King Moshiach (Tynis Yerushalmi Perek 4: Halachah 5), and also refers to each and every of Israel (Yerushalmi מע�ש Perek 4: Halachah 6). Since that within each and every one of Israel they have a spark of the soul of the Messiah – the aspect of the General Yichida, the soul of our righteous Messiah, and therefore, it is through the revelation of this aspect of the Yichida which is within each and every one of Israel [that] speeds up, quickens and makes real the revelation of the aspect of the General Yichida in the coming of our righteous Messiah. That then there will be revealed the ‘New Torah will go forth from Me’, the inner dimension of the Torah, the aspect of the Yichida of the Torah’. Which through it

309even ‘the heavens and the earth will I will make anew’ the revelation of the aspect of the Yichida throughout the entire world ‘Yichudo of the world’. … as Maimonides writes ‘not only the tribe of Levi alone, but rather etc, each and everyone etc’…since that the category of the Children of Israel is [because of and] from the Essential attachment to The Holy One Blessed Be He…which is equal amongst all the Children of Israel (therefore, the great in level is not to be considered any greater than another, and the small in level is not to be considered any way lacking than another) – with regards to the essence of their soul, the aspect of Yichida. In addition to the innovation of the Giving of the Torah- there is an innovation (and a renewal) in Torah itself: It is known that that even though with the Giving of the Torah there was given all ideas of the entire Torah, not just the Ten Commandments but the entire written Torah, together with the commentary, [that in it was contained] the Oral Torah that would be revealed and innovated throughout the continuation throughout all the following generations until now. As the saying of our Sages (Megila 19.b) states, ‘even that which a distinguished student will innovate in the future was said to Moses on Sinai’. This was in such a way that at the Giving of the Torah, the main aspect that was given was the Torah in general, and from them and through them it was necessary to reveal and bring out many particular issues that are in the Torah, until this particular point that was revealed through the distinguished student, it is his own innovation and the idea is called by his name… At the Giving of the Torah [there] was given the ideas of the Torah that will be revealed in the Future to Come, the teachings of Moshiach, that he will teach to the people (since that the Giving of the Torah was a one off [event], and will not take place again) however, it is only that these [innovative] issues were there in a state of concealment, so much so that, their revelation will be in the Future to Come and these are the aspect of the ‘New Torah (that is not able to be revealed through receivers of the Torah, or [even] a talented student, but rather through the ‘Giver of the Torah’ [Himself]) will go forth from Me’, …as our Sages say, ‘the Torah that Man learns in this world is Hevel [vanity] compared to the teachings of Moshiach.’ And it is via the innovations in the Torah (‘a New Torah will go forth from Me’) that also makes an innovation in the world…that is to say that, in addition to the innovation …that the explanation of that same idea has already been drawn down and revealed the first time [at Mount Sinai], and was renewed at its source and root yet another time (on an even higher level) that there is also an issue of innovation, that this new thing until that point had not brought out into revelation in Torah, ‘a new Torah’… [not a New’ but a revelation of what was already there in a state of concealment, since it was always there]… pp.584-6 …that therefore it will be that the entire world will be a dwelling place for His Blessedness in the lower realms, a dwelling place for His Essence, similarly to a dwelling of Man that there he is revealed in his Essence, so much so that (at particular times) without any garments [whatsoever!] p.587 …like the law of Maimonides ‘not only the tribe of Levi alone but rather each and everyone … it is just like they are merited with being Priests and Levites’.

310And this idea takes place through the revelation of the aspect of the Yichida as it is alluded to in the completion of the words of Maimonides; ‘behold David may he rest in peace said (Psalms 16:5) ‘The Lord is the portion of my inheritance and of my cup: thou maintainest my lot’ –that ‘lot- Goral’ [as in lottery] refers to the essence of the Soul, the aspect of the Yichida, [as mentioned previouly Sefer HaSichos 1990 Volume 1 pp.308-9] that [the same] aspect of David-King-Moshiach [within every person], that which through its revelation makes ‘each and every person’ a Holy example, comparable to (the tribe of Levi, a Levite or a Priest, until the level of) the Holiness of the High Priest (‘that this is as holy as the Holy of Holies’), the aspect of the Yichida that is within each one of Israel (in their soul), similar to the Holy of Holies (that aspect of Yichida) in space. And accordingly we can elaborate even more deeply, the feeling of Oneness of Israel at the [time of the] Giving of the Torah, as it is written ‘on the third month etc, on this day they came into the Sinai desert etc, and Israel camped there’. ‘Camped’ in the singular tense, ‘like one man with one heart’ (Yitro 1-2 and Rashi’s explanation, as well as the Mechilta). Therefore ‘the Holy One …said Behold it is the hour that I will give you my Torah’. That the oneness which is associated to the aspect of the Yichida, which has a unique connection with the teachings of Moshiach, [that is] the inner dimensions of the Torah, the aspect of the Yichida, which was given (and placed in the world) at the Giving of the Torah. And it is possible to say that this idea becomes even more expressed in the Shabbat after the Giving of the Torah, where the oneness of Israel …is because of the revelation of the teachings of Moshiach, that this is as an extension and [continuation] following the revelation of the Giving of the Torah [and particularly] ‘a New Torah will go forth from Me’. [Footnote- and an example of the Giving of the Torah that happens each day when one says ‘I take on myself the positive commandment of ‘and thou shall love your neighbour as yourself’’ after the Giving of the Torah on this day in the blessing on the Torah (‘gives the Torah’ present tense), like a preparation to ‘a New Torah will go forth from Me’, since that ‘I await for him the entire day’, all the throughout the day.] …It is possible to say that the main emphasis in this, is on the addition and innovation of the Torah through the acceptance of the Torah, which is primarily expressed in the language ‘Moses received …from Sinai etc’, [and subsiquently] this became the Torah of each and everyone who receives the Torah, it is through this, that one [can] learn and makes innovations in it. And moreover and this is the main thing- that the addition and innovation of the Torah of the Future to Come, is through the Giver [of the Torah] ‘a new torah will com forth from Me’… The Holy One Blessed Be He wanted to give merit to Israel etc, as it says (Isaiah 42:21) ‘The Lord was pleased for his righteousness’ sake, to magnify the Torah, and make it glorious. That the main and complete learning of ‘to magnify the Torah and make it glorious’, that is not for the sake of knowing the thing that you do, but rather in a way of ‘make research (in the Torah) and receive the reward’ (Sota 44.a) and this is in the ‘new Torah [that] will go forth from Me’. And since that the learning of the Torah is in such as way of ‘A New Torah will go forth from Me’, behold this spreads and even filters through into the standing and

311existence of the world… that in addition to this ‘the heavens and the earth will I will make anew’. And also the sense of unity [and oneness] of Israel that is because of the revelation of the aspect of the Yichida- that aspect of Moshiach, that through it is made the innovations in the Torah and [subsequently] in the heavens and the earth- [This] is expressed more clearly by first prefacing and concluding the sayings of Ethics of Our Fathers A) ‘All Israel have a portion in the World to Come, as it says and your nation are all righteous’ etc, an idea that is equal within all Israel because of their essential soul, the aspect of the Yichida. B) ‘to magnify the Torah and make it glorious’- …and we can add and explain the connection between the making of innovations within the Torah (‘a New Torah will go forth from Me’) and in the heaven and the earth (‘a new heavens and a new earth’)…also because of the issues of the Sabbath Day. …the issues of the Sabbath Day, are tied up with the Redemption, as is felt in the song of the day, ‘A Psalm, a poem, composed for the Sabbath Day’ (Psalms 92:1) ‘A Psalm, a poem for the Future to Come, to the day that is entirely Shabbat and rest for a life everlasting’ (the end of Tamid), and as it says in the benedictions of grace after meals on the Sabbath Day, ‘The Merciful One will inherit to us a day that is entirely Shabbat and everlasting rest forever’ …it is possible to say, that the renewal of Torah and of the World on the Sabbath Day, is tied in with the innovation within the Torah and the world of the Future to Come, the day that will be ‘entirely Sabbath and rest [peace] for a life everlasting’ ‘a new torah will come forth from Me’ and ‘the heaven and the earth I will make anew’. …that also the oneness of Israel because of the revelation of the aspect of the Yichida- the aspect of Moshiach, that through it is made the innovation in Torah and in the heavens and the earth- which is expressed on the Sabbath Day…and not only in a future tense, but also in a present tense, so that in the moment that follows it has already become passed tense, since that ‘behold he [Moshiach] comes’ and has already come. pp.592-4 And simply, the renewal and addition in the study of the Torah, in the midst of liveliness and pleasure brings about the making of innovations in Torah; whether [this is] with regards to oneself or concerning effecting others ‘make for yourself many students’, as is known that ‘every person of Israel are able to reveal mysteries of wisdom and intellectual innovations in Torah, whether in Aggada, or in the revealed aspects, or the hidden, [each] in accord with the aspect of the source of their soul, and it is incumbent for them to do so’ (Tanya Igres Kodesh Chapter 26 p.145.a) Including generally and in particular –the innovation and addition in the innovation of the teachings (torat) of Hassidism, which is a taste and an example of the ‘a taste of’ the teachings of Moshiach, that since through this is quickened, speeded up and make real the coming of David King Moshiach (Egret Ha Kodesh of the Baal Shem Tov, Keter Shem Tov in the beginning). p.597

312And ‘Moses and Aaron [will be resurrected] with them’, and the Baal Shem Tov and all our Rebbes our Leaders including His Holiness my father-in-law Admor [the Previous Rebbe], together with all the righteous and leaders of Israel and all the Children of Israel (‘and your people are all righteous’) in the generations that preceded this, that ‘they will arise and dance, those who sleep in the dust’ (Isaiah 26:19) together with all the Children of Israel in this generation, souls in bodies without a gap between them. And all of them together [will be] listening to the ‘new Torah (that will) issue forth from Me’, in our Holy Land…in the Holy of Holies… speedily and immediately now MYaD ‘מיד -immediately’ which stands for Moses, Yisrael (the Baal Shem Tov, that when the wellsprings go outwards the Master will come) David King Moshiach… p.597 …through this that it is revealed [in] the existence of a Jew- which is also [and particularly manifest in] his physical body – [that] it is tied up with the One Above, in the well known language: that the true existence of the created self is the existence of the True Self…so that his existence itself [i.e. the individual] is connected with the True Self. …thus the service has to be in such a way that the repetition becomes nature, through [and the continueous] training of the body: through this one is revealing the Essential power in the body of a Jew. p.604 …However, in the Future to Come- since that ‘in the belly of the waters evolves The Understanding, The Wisdom and The Truth as it says (Isaiah 11:9) ‘since the earth will be filled with the knowledge of God’ (Maimonides Hilchot Teshuvah end of Chap.9) and moreover, that ‘the whole world will not toil except…to know God alone…as it says since the earth will be filled with the knowledge of God as the waters cover the ocean bed’ –no longer will it be necessary for the tribe of Levi to separate themselves from worldly paths, since the world will be in its ultimate completion, and therefore the tribe of Levi will also receive their portion and inheritance in the land. It is possible to say that the ‘portioning’ into the 13 tribes in the Future to Come is tied up with the level of Oneness that transcends [this] division- [since] 13 is numerically equal to One. The separating of the land in the Future to Come will be in a way that ‘The Holy One Blessed Be He will Himself apportion it them, as it says (Ezekiel 48:29) ‘and these are their portions says the Lord God’ (Baba Basrah 122.a) and from this it is understood that also the division is with regards to and for the sake of Oneness. That therefore, ‘And the division in the World to Come will not be like the division in this world. In this world should a Man posses a corn field he does not posses an orchard, should he posses an orchard he does not posses a cornfield, but in the World to Come there will be no single individual who will not posses land in mountain, lowland and valley, for it is said, The gates of Reuben One, the gate of Judah One, the gate of Levi One, The Holy One Blessed Be He, will divide it among them’ (Baba Basrah 122.a). And the explanation of this (from the perspective of the inner [esoteric] workings of things) [is] that in this time one makes a purification of the world through the drawing out and revelation of levels of Godliness which has a relationship to the world, that

313therefore it dresses up in the multiplicity of the world. And [in contrast] in the Future to Come (after the completion of the purification of the world) there will also be a drawing out and revelation from levels of Godliness [but they will be from] a level of Godliness that transcends the division of the world, a Simple Oneness, that [transpires] through the Oneness of Israel, which they will all be on the level of Levites – ‘not only the tribe of Levi alone but rather each and every person whom gives his spirit to Him…behold this is as holy as the Holy of Holies and God will be their portion forever and ever…just as the Priest and Levites have merited’. (Maimonides the end of Hilchos Shmita and Yoval) And in even more detail – (in the Future to Come itself) behold this division between the status and situation of ‘the earth will be filled with the knowledge of God’ and ‘as the waters cover the sea’: [can be explained as] ‘the earth will be filled with the knowledge of God’; That the existence of the ‘earth’ is full and completely saturated with ‘the knowledge of God’, this is because and [in fact] through the level of Godliness that is comparable to the earth, that this is the level of Torah (‘the knowledge of God’) that it descended and flowed according to the limitations of the world (the level of division within the Torah). And above this, ‘as the waters cover’ that the existence of the earth is covered completely in the waters of knowledge- because of, and through the level of Godliness that transcends the earth, Torah in a state of Purity, the wisdom of The Holy One Blessed Be He (‘One Torah’) which, through the drawing out and revelation in the world which is clearly and seen to be in a revealed state that the existence of the entire world is not anything but the revelation of the wisdom of The Holy One Blessed Be He, ‘everything was made with wisdom’ and as our sages say ‘everything that which The Holy One Blessed Be He created was only for His glory’ and ‘there is no glory except the Torah’, and in the words of Maimonides … ‘the foundations of all foundations and the pillar of The wisdom is to know that there is a first Being etc, and no beings exist but from the True Being’, ‘it is that the Torah says there is nothing but Him’. pp.630-1 … Mitzvoth- that their fulfilment should be (not only with regards to the level of division that is within them and is comparable and associated with the multiplicity [and division] of Man and of the world, but rather) also with regards to the point of Oneness that is within them- ‘therefore you shall remember and do all that I command’, that the carrying out of all the Mitzvoth should be in a way of ‘I command’ (‘Mitzvoth-God’). …and also the particular service of each and every one of Israel in accordance with the difference between them, also including and in particular in the idea of ‘according to your own understanding’ (the main being of Man) that ‘there are no minds alike’ (Brochot 58.a and Sanhedrin 38.a/b) It is necessary to be a saturated in the point of Unity that transcends division, which takes into consideration the expressions (at least) in the midst of Love of Israel [thy fellow Jew] and the Oneness of [all] Israel, that one meditates with ones understanding (‘according to you own understanding’) in the needs of the Other, to help and empower and release him from all that troubles him, in spiritual terms and physically… p.632

314And learning ‘a New Torah (that) will go forth from Me’ in such a way that ‘one man will no longer teach his neighbour etc, because will know Me’… p.634 What does ‘outside’ … mean? [i.e. spreading the welsprings of the Baal Shem Tov outward to the outside]– It would seem [at first glance] that [the idea of] ‘outside’, cannot [be connected to or have an association with, the idea of] completion (which [by definition can [only really] found inside [i.e.] in Holiness and in Godliness)!? The explanation [and resolution] of this is: that since [the word and idea of] ‘outside’ actually [comes] from the language of the Torah or Truth, this would [therefore] imply that there is a true [and inner] idea of ‘outside’. That the truth of the matter is that, there is no [real] ‘outside’ [which is seperated and distinct] from the One Above, God forbid (as it says ‘there is nothing but Him’(V’Etchanan 4:35) ‘Nothing Else’ ibid, 4:38); And this that it [does] state in the Torah, [and use] the language of ‘outside’, [therefore, really] means [that] the truth contained within, ‘outside’ – [is] that [the] ‘outside’ [just] means [a type of] revelation of Godliness. And more than this: it is especially in and through the ‘outside’ that (lowly and concealing the light of God) that [through which] is made clear the revelation [of God] in its completion and the ultimate completion the truth of Godliness, that ‘there is Nothing Else (besides Him)’ even that of ‘outside’. p.639 ‘He redeemed my soul in peace from battles against me, for with many were with [or against?] me. (Psalms 55:19) …the ‘multiple’ it says ‘were with me’; Since that this is together with and moreover including in the ‘Singular realm’ the Yichudo of the World, so that it should be in its ultimate completion and the ultimate truth…that the redemption is in a way of peace (without there being war)…the completion in the True and Complete Redemption as it is written ‘then the nations language (plural) will be transformed to a pure tongue etc, to serve [shoulder to shoulder] together as One’ (as the Mitiler Rebbe explains in Shari Teshuva Podeh BShalom chap.11) p.640 It is understood that in a time that even small children say that these days we hope and request that Moshiach should come, this is a true innovation in Torah, so much so that this itself is part of the ‘New [innovation-in] Torah’ that is ‘going forth from Me’ from God Himself… p.644 …the union and joining of the Congregation of Israel and One Above and likewise the union of every Jew all together [Yachid] (‘and you shall be gathered one by One’ Isaiah 27:12) with Atzmus and Mahus –so that you become One existence literally –‘and you shall be One flesh’ (Genesis 2:12) in such a way as Yachid, and even higher than Yachid. Therefore it is surely not conceivable that there should be a separation God forbid, because on the contrary; it is this especially that there is an idea of the becoming One, and the becoming One in its ultimate completion. …that it will become apparent and recognised, not only that ‘the time of Redemption has come’ but that it is already simply the Redemption… Redemption shares the

315language of revelation – the revelation of the Master [Alufo] of the world in the ‘Exile - Gola’ (that this is made possible through the service of the Jews in Exile) …It is through Torah the connection and Oneness of Jews with God … …all in One existence of ‘Yichida L’Yichidecha’ …the completion of the Oneness of the Jews with the One Above…and through this it is brought about the Oneness also with the world…and through the revelation of the Yichida of the soul within each and everyone of Israel that this is the (part of ) Moshiach in every Jew, and especially in the general the People of Israel when they come together (many minyans) in a House of Three (Torah, Prayer, and Good Deeds) there will be a revelation of the General Yichida our Righteous Moshiach. And the words ‘Yichida L’Yichidecha’- is the Oneness of all issues together in One and singular point, that is in a revealed state in the time a place of the True and Complete Redemption, which will happen particularly from the these place and present time. That then it will be reveal the ultimate completion and ultimate truth of all things in all the entire world- that it is a dwelling place for His Blessedness here below… Together with ‘a New Torah’ from our righteous Messiah, and the continuation of this through the One Above ‘a New Torah will go forth from Me’… pp.646-8 On the contrary, it is especially through the descent downwards in a place of pain- that allows to reveal that ‘I am with you in you pain’ (Psalms 91:15) that this is referring to His Blessed Essence [Atzmuso], that transcends all levels and limitations of the chaining down [evolution] of [spiritual] worlds [both that of] higher and lower, and is therefore that even though the One Above is High that there is none higher, and pain is in the lowest world that there is no lower, nevertheless ‘I am with you in pain’. …since that every Jew is a part of ‘a nation of Priests’ ‘High Priests’ …it is understood that within each Jew there is a taste of the idea of ‘the staff Aaron had blossomed’ and ‘it brought forth a blossom, sprouted a bud and almonds ripened’. (Numbers 17:23) p.660 …even though our sages say that Moshiach will come ‘b’Hessech ha daat -without knowing’ this is in no way a contradiction God forbid, to thinking about and meditating in a way of ‘daat - understanding’ ([Da’at, the etymology of which is to be found in the verse: ‘And Adam knew (yada) Eve’ (Gen.4:1) implies attachment and union.] That is, one binds his mind with a very firm and strong bond to, and firmly fixes his thought, (Tanya end of Chap.3)) on ideas of Moshiach and Redemption (and at least the thought and meditation must be to know and to realise [and recognise] that we are already standing at the entrance to the Days of Moshiach, ‘Behold It Come’. Since that it has already happened that all the end dates have passed [for his coming], and we have already done repentance, and we have completely finished all issues of service…) since the [prefered] explanation of ‘without knowing’ is [a level or awareness which] ‘transcends [mere] knowledge’. This means that, after these ideas permeate and fill ones understanding (through thinking and meditating etc), this becomes in a mode that is (without and) beyond knowledge.

316 And in regards to what to do in actuality -…after we have seen the known miracles that this is ‘the year that the King Moshiach is revealed’, we can see that we find it difficult, to prepare and absorb and feel that we are literally standing at border of the Days of Moshiach so much so that one should begin ‘to live with’ the ideas of Moshiach and Redemption. … And the answer to this is – that through the learning of the Torah in issues of Moshiach and Redemption, since the power of, the Torah (which is the Wisdom of The Holy One…which transcends the world) to change the [very] nature of Man, that even though it is difficult for him to feel it, [and it may be that] he is still God forbid, [far] removed from the idea of Redemption (since that he has still not gone out of his own inner exile), [nevertheless] through the learning of the Torah in ideas of the Redemption, this elevates him to a state and situation of [personal] redemption, and starts to live with the ideas of the Redemption, in the midst of understanding and conscious-awareness and feeling that ‘Behold it has Come’. pp.692-3 And according to this we can understand the directive ‘Make here the Land of Israel’: that even though one feels that one is in exile, the next moment the Redemption will come and we will go into the Land of Israel- a) That the service is in this time and at this place b) The service consists of ‘making here the Land of Israel’, to bring into the ‘here’ (this place and time) ‘the Land of Israel’, the completion of the state of the Redemption- as would do a ‘Pnimi’ that brings in to a state of completion in every aspect of his service, (also in the issues that are a preparation for other things) and c) this itself, if one Jew cried for the Redemption, this would bring the complete Redemption that all Jews returning themselves [turning it in]to the Land of Israel simply, and in the future the Land of Israel will spread to all the lands (through this service of ‘making here the Land of Israel’). p.704 As is known from this that ‘each and every one is obligated to say the world was created for me’ (Mishna Sanhedrin 37.a) that this means that the entire world was created for him, it is understood [therefore] that he has the power [and ability] to accomplish [anything] in the entire world. [Therefore in and] through ones particular portion [of the world, which] it includes all the entire world (as it is written (Ecclesiastes 3:11) ‘and I have placed the world in your heart’) [thus each and everyone, individually has the ability to change the entire world]. p.706 …And through [the fullfilment of]…the service of ‘making here the Land of Israel’ completely, [which means] to accustom oneself to the Redemption –that will be speedily and immediately now literally. We will be dancing in the Redemption, and from this we will all go and dance in the Land of Israel, and go and divide [and appropriate] the portions of the Land of Israel of the Future to Come into the ‘thirteen tribes’ this will be done by the One Above Himself, ‘The Holy One Blessed Be He will divide for them Himself’, and (as explained above) in the future the Land of Israel will spread to all the lands. p.708

317 And to explain, that then it will be (in the time of the Redemption) it will not necessitate the coming to writing – since that all the Jews will hear Torah from Atzmus and Mahus, as it is written ‘a New Torah will go forth from Me’ through the true expert student- our righteous Moshiach who will ‘teach all the nation’ the ‘New Torah’ of Atzmus and Mahus in additional explanation and elucidation etc, and learning will be via seeing in particular, that then they will not come to a written word, as is understood simply from that which it says (Jeremiah 31:32) ‘and a person will no longer teach his neighbour, because all will know Me, from the small to the great’. p.766 ‘See, I present before you today a blessing…’ (Deuteronomy 11:26) … ‘See’ –is related to and it is necessary that it should not only be on the level of hearing, but (also) on the level of ‘seeing’, [Seeing the Essence of God] ‘Anochi - I am’ ‘Anochi mi sh’Anochi’ I am that which I am’ ‘Give[r]’ –‘all with the Giver has given in your eye is beautiful’, ‘before you’ –to your innerness ‘this day’ –in a way of light and revelation and in a way of everlasting ‘blessing etc’ – all issues of blessings, whether these be revealed blessings or those which are even higher the aspect of hidden. p.773 ‘See, I present before you today a blessing…’ (Deuteronomy 11:26) , all issues of blessings, and mainly the main blessing of the true and complete Redemption- that there should not be any separation between hearing (and understanding) that ‘Behold this (the King Messiah) Cometh’ but only that it need to be seen with our flesh eyes, and not only as ‘will show you’ future tense but rather ‘See’ present tense and in the language of a command! p.776 And Simply: To proclaim and publicise in all places –in words that issue out from the heart- that the Holy One Blessed Be He says (through His servant the Prophets) to each and everyone of Israel ‘See, I present before you today a blessing’, so much so that this day literally we will see with our flesh eyes the blessing of the true and complete Redemption. p. 778 …The explanation of this is not that Israel precede and are above the Torah, and that they have no connection to the Torah, God forbid, as it is understood the word itself ‘In the Beginning B’reshis’ is one word, which includes in it ‘two beginnings’ Torah and Israel, this means that even though in a revealed sense that Torah and Israel are two [different and separate] things, however in truth and in essence they are one entity: Jews are tied up with Torah, (‘they are our live and the length of our days’ –Ahavat Olam for Evening services) and Torah is tied up with Jews (‘the entire Torah is commandments to Israel’) And the explanation of this is that ‘Israel precedes’ the Torah; is so to speak, in a way of encompassing and surrounding: Torah is was give for the Jewish people

318(‘commandments to Israel’), and therefore, this is why the saving of life pushes away the whole Torah (Yoma 82.b and Ketubot 19.a) and not the other way around. The fulfilment of the Torah is not the concern of Jews, there has to be Jews that accepts on themselves and fulfils the Torah (since that he is ‘an inheritance of the congregation of Jacob’) which is not the case with the continued existence of Israel which is a concern even if the other is a transgressor of the Torah and its commandments God forbid, -as the statement of our sages says (Sanhedrin 42.a) ‘even though he sins he is still Israel’ since the Jews are higher than the Torah (however this only becomes revealed in the idea of Teshuvah …however even this is in order to reveal the Essence of a Jew that is beyond the Torah… This means that in Israel there are two levels the first: a) As the souls of Israel have descended below into a body in this physical world, where he becomes a ‘literally a created [separate] self’, that together with the covering and concealment of world, where his connection with The Holy One Blessed Be He is not revealed, and therefore he has to reveal this [connection] through the Torah, which its being below is ‘the Torah and the Holy One Blessed Be He are One’ b) And through this (the connection of Israel with Torah) – that reveals the essence of Israel that ‘Israel and the Holy One Blessed Be He are all One’ that they precede and are higher than the Torah. That therefore Jews have the potential to give [life] to the Torah and to make innovations in the Torah so that they can join Torah with The Holy One Blessed Be He which transcends the Torah... …as is understood from the saying of our sages … that ‘each and everyone is obligated to say, the world was created for me’; This also (as is understood) includes every single Jew, even those who are people of the land [not Torah educated] which do not have any association with the Torah …it is therefore possible to say that this also expresses itself when it comes to action, with regards to a child or a minor of Israel (that is before they are able to speak or to learn the Torah in an open and revealed fashion), in a like manner one who is a minor in intelligence who therefore has no revealed connection [or association] with the Torah (not of his own fault God forbid, also a Tinnuk sh’nishba/ [a Halachic category of a child who was kidnapped and has lived with Gentiles for much of his/her life] amongst the nations…) –that therefore the One Above put him into that situation and therefore is not guilty, it is that he is also no revealed association with the Torah, he is therefore at the level of ‘first fruits’, which belongs ‘before the Lord your God’, that precedes and is transcends all issue of the world, even preceding the Torah, and all things are his and was created ‘for him’. … ‘first fruits’ – the essential advantage of Israel (that precedes the Torah) is the beginning and foundation of all the Torah and its commandments: since this that ‘Israel and the Holy are All One’… …the ultimate state of a Jew is to become ‘first fruits’ –and within this itself, and all was created for you, for your sake, it is therefore understood that every single detail in the life of a Jew (even that which does not have a revealed association with Torah) –every moment in time, every single point in space, every miniscule thought, word and action, has purpose in and of itself, (and is not a means to any other end [other

319than itself]). This means that it is a completely brand new thing (with regards to the [ultimate] purpose that the particular [thing] has in and of itself alone), it is on them that the obligation applies to say ‘for me (for this particular [thing]) the world was created’, this means that all things, all the moments in time etc are all included in that One moment. …It is particularly Jews who have the potential and ability to accomplish ‘the entire day[s] it will be in your eyes as new’ a true innovation …each day, which also includes every single moment, so that every moment is new, it is the beginning of innovation within ones own service of Torah and Mitzvoth, it become in him, that all moments include [from the start] till the end and conclusion of his service, An example of this is, that Jews especially have the ability to make an innovation, in the Torah itself (since they precede it), this means that one makes an innovation in ones learning of the Torah itself, that one literally becomes a New Man, (through his learning of the Torah) and each day and moment in a new way. pp.817-21 Sefer HaSichos 5752-1992 Volume 1 …and uniquely in the issue which is very important- [i.e.] the True and Complete Redemption, [should take place] quickly and now literally. And in especially as there have already been many signs of this –beginning with the sayings of our sages (Sanhedrin 97.b) quite a few years and generations before now; ‘all the deadlines have passed and the only thing that remains is repentance’, and as His Holiness my father-in-law …the Previous Rebbe…the leader of the generation has explained that repentance has already been done, and we already stand ready ‘together at the ready’, and be have been so for some time now. It should be immediately now the true and complete Redemption, and at that moment all Jews ‘our youth and our elders etc, and our sons and our daughters’, [will] go to the Holy Land. And within this itself in the capital city of Jerusalem, on the holy mountain, and in the [holy] Temple, into the Holy of Holies, where there resided the foundation stone, that from it the world was founded. And the Holiness of the Holy of Holies and of the foundation stone will spread immediately and literally throughout the entire world. p.1 …The name of the Tzemach Tzedek [the third Lubavitcher Rebbe] (which he was given this name from the title of his [main] work) is the name of our righteous Moshiach, which he is called ‘Tzemach - Branch’ and ‘Tzedek - righteous’ (‘Tzemach’ –‘a man who’s name is Tzemach’ (the liturgy for Hoshanos on Hoshanah Rabbah. Zakariah 6:12 (and the commentaries there). Ibid 3:8, Jeremiah 23:5, Rashi 33:15) And continuing to draw connections between the name of the Ztemach Ztedek and our righteous Moshiach: the Ztemach Ztedek- the leader of the third generation of the leaders of Chabad (which corresponds to the sphere of ‘Understanding’, [that is following the Kabbalistic formulation of the spheres, particular to Chabad,

320Chochman, Binna, Daas…]) he included in him all the leaders, that through his teachings was included all the leaders before him and includes [in potential] all the leaders after him, even including my father-in-law… the Previous Rebbe, the leader of the generation. This means that our Rebbes our leaders, including the issue of the revelation of the inner dimension of the Torah and the spreading of the wellsprings outwards, via our Rebbes, our leaders, is tied up with the revelation of our righteous Moshiach, and particularly my father-in-law…the Previous Rebbe the leader of the generation as is hinted to in his name ‘Yoseph Yitzchak’ from the name ‘God will add (Yoseph) with two hands’ (Isaiah 11:11) – it is thus understood that this (the connection between the Rebbes and Moshiach) was there clearly felt by the Ztemach Ztedek and is therefore included in all the leaders [of Chabad]. …one can say that this also is connected to Moshiach- that in addition to the revelation of the name of Moshiach, the way it is tied together with the Yichida (the general Yichida) from there also the Essence of our righteous Moshiach, which it is one thing with Atzmus En Sof, and therefore the revelation of Moshiach …is tied up with the acceptance of the kingship of God… We can tie this together with the idea of ‘and Moses went’ (the going from exile to redemption…) according to that which has been said recently concerning the anachronism (which is particularly associated with the leaders of Chabad [namely the Rebbe] and via this, to all of Israel in all generations) of ‘מיד -immediately’ ‘…immediately they will be redeemed’ (Maimonides Hilchos TeshuvaPerek 7 Halachah 5) –מ Moses, י Yisrael (Baal Shem Tov), ד David (King Moshiach). All three (Moses, Israel Baal Shem Tov and David King Moshiach) are tied up with ‘immediately they will be redeemed’: Moses is the first redeemer and the last redeemer (Zohar Chadash 253.a) Israel the Baal Shem Tov – that Moshiach answered him in connection to the question ‘when will the master come?’ –‘that when your wellsprings (of the Baal Shem Tov) spread outwards’. And David King Moshiach –that through him [will] come the true and complete Redemption in actuality. pp.4-7 …and the power to reveal the ‘י’ Yud (the quintessential point of Jewishness) –the Yichida of the soul (the spark of Moshiach in each one of Israel) the Essence of the soul –which is a Jew, this came particularly through Israel Baal Shem Tov through the revelation of the teachings of Hassidism – that this goes generally on the whole gamut of the teachings of Hassidic philosophy from all our Rebbes, our leaders (that are tied up with Moshiach) and particularly this was in a state of revelation by the Ztemach Ztedek, which he includes all our Rebbes, leaders… p.8 …the true and complete Redemption. And in a way that this happens in a way of passed, that even though that at this moment literally it is that Moshiach has still not come, is in the moment that he does come in the moment after that- the One Above (through bring down [into the world] the Aleph of the Master of the world) and the moments [directly] before that (of exile) that they should be a part of Redemption. …and moreover and this is the main thin: that speedily and immediately [now] literally… on the birthday of the Ztemach Ztedek –there should be the revelation of

321our righteous Moshiach in a way of ‘pointing with our finger and say this’ this is Moshiach who is called ‘Temach’, this is Moshiach who is called ‘Ztedek’, that this is Moshiach who is called ‘Yoseph Yitzchak’ (the name of …the Previous Rebbe the leader of the generation) and moreover and this is the main thing- this is Moshiach who is called ‘David King Moshiach’ together with Moses our teacher, ‘the first redeemer is the last redeemer’ together with Israel Baal Shem Tov and all the Rebbes Leaders, in a way of ‘immediately’ quickly and immediately [now] literally. p.10 …and through the service of Man in the fulfilment of the Torah and its commandments, draws down and reveals in the world even the level of Godliness that transcends the world, until the drawing down and revelation of His Blessed Being and Essence (Mahusso and Atzmusso) in the world, that this is the idea of ‘the Holy One Blessed Be He created [the world] for it to be a dwelling place for His Blessedness in the lower realms, that the existence of the world (lower realms) will make a dwelling where His Blessed Being and Essence is revealed. p.15 … the division into two (the main content of the Second Day [of creation] that was created the [idea of] division), the opposite of the Oneness that ‘the Holy One Blessed Be He is the [Only] One in the world’. This was in order that there was felt the true union between them (the peace of the Third Day). Through the service of Man, that through this is made an elevation that is completely incomparable…separate from the place and situation that preceded the service. p.19-20 …That the completion of [any of] the months alludes to the completion of Israel, that are ‘comparable to the moon’ and ‘Israel reckons by the moon’ (Succot 29.a) and ‘in the Future it will be renewed as [it was] before it decrease’ (Blessings for the Sanctification of the moon (Sanhedrin 42.b), through ‘David King of Israel exists and lives’ (ibid) David King Moshiach. p.24 …therefore is also understood in regards to the service of Jews…a service infused with the idea of Redemption and Moshiach. This means, that Jews must bring in all things of ones day, [i.e.] ones day to day life, even in this time quickly and immediately before the Redemption – this is a taste and an example of the life and behaviour of Jews in the Days of Moshiach literally. (that this is the unique emphasis of the most resent stage with regards to the learning of the ‘laws of Moshiach’ the laws that are associated [that concern] with the life of Jew in the time of the Redemption. (5751b p.690-3) One of the main issues of the Future to Come is that there will come about the completion of ‘You have been shown, to know that the Lord is God: there is nothing else aside from Him’. That there will be revealed in the whole world entirely that there is not existence other that His Blessedness ‘there is nothing else’. …this does not mean, that the intention and ultimate reason for all worldly things is Godliness, and therefore ones service is in a way of ‘all you work should be for the sake of Heaven’ and ‘know Him in all your ways’, but rather [that] there is no such

322thing as ‘secular’, ‘your work’ and ‘your ways’ and even more so: that the worldly affairs are themselves [litterally] Godliness, and thus consequentially one ‘hears’ to begin with, that there is no other existence, that there is ‘Nothing but Him alone’. p.39 … ‘I was not created but only to serve my Creator’, that it is precisely through this that brings about the Redemption, which one becomes in this [state of personal redemption] through that (of ‘Nothing but Him Alone’). However now [at this point in time] this obstacle is also already gone, and consequentially ‘Everything is prepared for the meal’ the feast of the Leviathan, the Behemoth and the hidden wine, in the true and complete Redemption…now. …the education of children …must be in a way that the children are thoroughly certain and totally infused with the singular point of the idea of ‘Moshiach’, so that when one looks at a Jewish child what ones sees is Moshiachs! There entire existence is ‘Moshiach’ the revelation of ‘You have been shown etc, there is nothing else aside from Him’. p.40 …the joy of Simchas Torah is not from learning the Torah, but rather specifically through dancing with the Torah…all Jews from the greatest to the smallest…are literally equal. We can say that this is also connected with the relationship and unique revelation of Moshiach…that in the Days of Moshiach it states ‘one person will no longer teach his neighbour for all will know Me, from the smallest to the greatest’ (Jeremiah 31:33)… p.41 …That this is the idea of the name of YHVH ה� to מהוה from the language of ,י�ה�וbring into existence, until the name ה� that which is beyond the world, was is and י�ה�וwill be -past present and future as One, the Essential Name. And until the power of Atzmus which is in the creation from nothing to something,…that it is recognised that the existence of the created self is the True Self. p.61 …that since that the declaration of …the Previous Rebbe the leader of the generation, that we have already finished all of the matters of the service, also including the polishing of the buttons, and we stand ready …to accept the face of our righteous Moshiach, behold the conclution of a righteous appraisal [of ones self]…that makes of these days, which they are, speedily and literally immediately nessesitates the true and complete Redemption in literal actuality! p.65 …and it is definite and certain that all the deadlines have already passed, and repentance has already been done, and now the thing is not dependant on anything but in our righteous Moshiach himself! p.66 … ‘Sun God’, that from it is flows the revelation [with]in the name Elohim, ‘the sun and the shield, YHVH –Elohim’. And according to this, the changes in the light of the moon, in the way that it receives the light from the sun; … teaches of the way of the flow and revelation of the name of YHVH within the name Elohim. So that in the

323Future to Come, the lacking of the moon will be made full, and there will not be any decrease and the light of the moon, [and it] will be like the light of the sun. And [thus] there will be the completion of the union and the revelation of the Name YHVH in the name Elohim ‘the Lord is YHVH is Elohim’. p.67 … ‘and we will place before you… commandments according to Your will’, also including the completion of the sanctification of the moon in a way of receiving the Divine Presence –‘appears before Elohim’ (Psalms 84:8) and more than this, ‘appear etc in front of the Lord, YHVH’ (Exodus 23:17), Also including the Union of the Name YHVH and the name Elohim, that is felt in the sanctification of the moon… ‘the Lord is YHVH is Elohim’, in elevation after elevation, this is the explanation of ‘YHVH is Elohim’ that we say…after ‘Hear Oh Israel the Lord is our God the Lord is One’ (the Rebbe then started the song) ‘YHVH is Elohim’‘YHVH is Elokim’‘YHVH is Elokim’‘YHVH is Elohim’‘YHVH is Elohim’‘YHVH is Elokim’‘YHVH is Elokim’‘YHVH is Elokim’ the coming year in Jerusalem! p.69 …the Land of Israel in completion, all the ten lands, which is a part of the land that Jews inherited from our forefathers with the covenant of between the [halves of] Flesh; And the innovation now is that, there is also coming the three lands in a way of pleasantness and a way of peace, that in that time (in the Days of Moshiach) there will not be any …war’ (Maimonides Hichat Malachim Chap.36 p.46.a) but they will be given by nations of the world will from their own good will. p.75 …every Jew has an obligation ‘Lecha - to you’ in the learning of Torah- ‘what he is able’, to make innovations in Torah. p.82 …additional learning of the Torah, not only with ones three intellectual faculties [Chochma, Bina and Daas] and seven emotions [Hessed, Gevura, Tiferes, Netzach, Hod, Yesod and Malchus] but rather in the three intellectual faculties themselves. That this is uniquely by the addition in ones learning of the inner dimensions of the Torah (including the purification of those issues in the intellectual service) including the concepts of the Redemption and our righteous Moshiach. …and together with this, there will be, the completion of all the ten powers of the soul- the seven emotions and the three intellects, together with, and this is also the main thing- with the revelation of the new Torah [that will] go forth from Me… p.84 … ‘and God appear to Avram’… Firstly on the level of Godliness that is as it is written ‘and God appeared to him’, [which is] the revelation of the Name YHVH (that is above the name Elohim), and an even higher level in the Name YHVH… Secondly in the revelation to Abraham –‘and God appeared to him’ that the higher revelation was revealed to him and was accepted by him, that he made a vessel for the revelation that was higher, that flowed and permeated in his innerness…

324…according to the well known idea that the conception of the entire creation was because of the desire of the Holy One Blessed Be He to have for His Blessedness a dwelling place in the lower realms; That means to say that, not only that the revelation of Godliness flowed in all of the [spiritual] order of the evolution [of worlds] until it flowed and was revealed, until it also reached the lower realms, but rather on the contrary, that the dwelling place for His Blessedness was specifically in the lower realms [itself]. Since, the level of Godliness that is revealed in the higher worlds is the aspect of revelation. However, the revelation of the literal Essence (which is beyond the aspect of revelation), His Blessed Being and His Essence (Mahuso v’ Atzmusso) is specifically in the lower realms, that there [in the lower realms] is made a dwelling place for His Blessedness, a dwelling place for His Essence, that here He is revealed in all His Self. pp.86-7 …the Holy soul, the Godly Soul, that it is on the highest levels of Godliness ‘literally a part of God from Above’ and the Essence is it that when you touch a part of it you touch the whole thing, one touches in the Essence of God literally. p.88 …according to what has been mentioned above, that the existence of ‘and God appeared to him’ comes constantly to each and every one of Israel, and what is needed is just to actualise [and realise it, in order] that this existence will be in [a state of] revelation. We can say that this is also true with regards to the mission of ‘and God appeared to him’, that is, in the true and complete Redemption via our righteous Moshiach. It is known that each and every one of Israel has a spark of the soul of Moshiach, the aspect of the Yichida, that it is a spark of the aspect of General Yichida which is the soul of Moshiach. This is why each and every one of Israel is called by the name ‘star - kochav’, a name of Moshiach. As it says concering [Moshiach] ‘the path of the star of Jacob’. And this is felt even more so by the small (children) of Israel- as our sages say, that the children of the house of Raban are called ‘my anointed - Meshiachi’. And it can be said, that the aspect of the Yichida, the spark of Moshiach, is revealed more by children, since that the inner powers are not revealed that much (and therefore also their consciousness in Godliness is in the Essence of God - Atzmusso Isbarech). And this ideas is made real and revealed through … each and everyone of Israel fulfilling their mission of the Holy One…- as is also hinted to in the word ‘Sheliach - which alludes to the ten powers of the (10) ’י‘ with an addition of a Yud [which] ’שליחsoul, …is numerically equal to ‘Moshiach’. To reveal the spark of Moshiach that is there, [i.e] the aspect of the Yichida, [so] that its revelation and [its] saturation in the physical body and in physical things, in ones portion of the world, until that in the forming of all of the sparks of Moshiach, that are in all of Israel, is revealed and the general Moshiach comes, our righteous Moshiach, that then there will be a revelation of Godliness in Israel (‘and God appeared to him’) in the world… in ultimate completion. And this idea is the main teaching and directive [learnt] from the explanation of and ‘appeared’; That each and everyone of Israel needs to yurn even more for the

325revelation of ‘and God appeared to him’ in [the form of the revelation of God in] the true and complete Redemption. And to do all one is able to do, so that one is ready for it, and through this that each and every one of one’s actions is done is such a way that anticipates the state and situation of the true and complete Redemption. … the teachings of Hassidism…is a taste and example of the idea of ‘and God appeared to him’ that Godly ideas that are explained in Hassidic philosophy (‘to know the God of your father’) brings to sight to ones minds eyes. pp.92-93 …that the existence of Moshiach in the spark of Moshiach (the aspect of the Yichida) that is within each and everyone of Israel, this also keeps in existence the existence of the actual Moshiach (the general Yichida) … And according to that which is known that my father-in-law…the Previous Rebbe, the leader of the generation, the Moshiach of the generation, that all the matters of the service have been finished and completed and we are standing ready to receive the face of our righteous Moshiach …since we already have (not only the existence of the Moshiach, but) also the revelation of Moshiach, and now all that is required is only to accept the [presence and] face of our righteous Moshiach in actuality! p.95 … even in the inanimate ‘a stone will call out and recognise’ (Habakkuk 2:11) and how much more so with regards to the Children of Israel that they will recognise and call out ‘Behold this is our God’ (Isaiah 25:9). And since that, this is the case, it is understood that all the issues and all the actions are permeated with ideas of Moshiach and Redemption. Also including eating and drinking and sleeping, that we are banqueting at the meal of the Leviathan, the Behemoth and the hidden wine. So much so that also after the [normal] meal there is a hunger for the meal of the Leviathan, the Behemoth and the hidden wine, and consequentially the requirement of The Holy One… Since one is unable to fulfil the Mitzvah of ‘eating and being satisfied and blessing’ in truth, until The Holy One …sits with us at the table at the banquet of the Future to Come… And the main thing is that all of this should be in a revealed and literal manner, ‘pointing to with our finger and say; ‘This’ ‘Behold This (The King Moshiach) has come’ and behold my father-in-law …the Previous Rebbe, the leader of the generation (‘arise and rejoice those who rest in the dust’) and ‘Behold this is our God etc, this is YHVH, we have waited for him, we will be glad and rejoice in his salvation’ (Isaiah 25:9), the rejoicing of the true and complete redemption revealed and in actuality that then we will make the blessing on it ‘that he has kept us alive and brought us to this time’. pp.95-6 …the foundation of bringing about the whole purpose of the [out-reach] mission in this generation in general and in particularly –the innovation in the service of the mission that has come about in recent times: [i.e.] to accept the face of our

righteous Moshiach in the true and complete Redemption.

326…it is not just one part (but a general part) of the mission, moreover, it is an fundamental and an extremely overarching principle, which is the most primary issue of Judaism – the preparation to bring our righteous Moshiach- that this encompasses all the singular points of the service of the missions. [All of the Ten Miftzas, where just in order for this one- to accept Moshiach]. p.97 …our sages (Midrash Lekach Tov פ� say that ‘(Moses) said before the Master of ( עהthe Universe, send the one whom You will send’ –in the hand of Moshiach that he will in the future redeem’. And according to this we can say that within [the boundaries and definitions of] Moshiach has the definition of a sheliach according to [the authority of the] Torah. Moshiach is the messenger (‘send…you will send’) of the Holy One Blessed Be He to redeem the Jews. p.98 …every issue that a Jew does, he hears the Oneness of his soul and body with the One Above, ‘a messenger of a (the supernal) man is just like him’, so that, ‘literally like him’… p.106 …the mission of the One Above is to bring the true and complete Redemption, when there will be the completion of the union of the soul and the body, Israel and the Holy One Blessed Be He are One. And also in the world – the complete revelation of Godliness in this physical world, so that then the entire world will be a dwelling place for His Blessedness in the lower realms… p.107 …This means that, all the singularities of the service of the mission of the spreading of Torah and Judaism, and the spreading of the wellsprings outwards, should be permeated with the singular point- which is to lead to the receiving of the face of Moshiach. p.111 … ‘to bring [to the Days of Moshiach]’, to do all you are able to do to bring ‘to the Days of Moshiach’, plural tense, not just the start of one day, but rather of Days (plural tense) – the Days of Moshiach (and not just while Moshiach is the ‘presumed Messiah’, but rather all the Days of Moshiach- which also includes there completion of ‘Definitely Moshiach’ etc)… Every messenger must himself get prepared and prepare all Jews in his place and city etc, to receive the face of our righteous Moshiach…in a way that is acceptable to everyone according his intellect and ability to understand, including and especially – through the learning of ideas of Moshiach and Redemption…the sheliach of this generation –…my father-in-law the Previous Rebbe the leader of the generation and this is applicable to the generation that precedes this one, that …my father-in-law the Previous Rebbe is One with his father which he is an only child, thus there is a completion of all of the ‘seven branches of the Menorah - candelabra’ all seven generations…(…thus the One Above is a sheliach…and together with the Ten Sephirot – that is Atzmus and Mahuss is so to speak our righteous Moshiach) ‘send the one you will send’ send us our righteous Moshiach in actuality! p.112

327…(that the Torah is for the sake of Israel, commandments to Israel) which Israel precede. We can even make a parallel from this with the soul and body, that since that these commandments are not associated with the soul that was in the Garden of Eden -Heaven, but [rather] …the body, according to this it is necessary to understand that the body preceded, and for its sake [i.e. the body] the soul was created …And the reasoning behind this is according to that which is well known that the choice of the Atzmus which it is particularly in the body… p.117 …the Essential advantage of Israel that they precede the Torah, that the connection of Israel with the Holy One Blessed Be He, because of the real Essence that is beyond the connectivity [of being] in relation to the revelations [of God]… p.119 … ‘Oil’ alludes to the essence of the thing (‘Essence’ [the Rebbe uses the English word]), that therefore it oozes forth from [almost] every thing. That it flows and permeates into all spaces, until down below (outside), which in the drawing down and revelation especially below where it is felt the revelation of the literal Essence… p.121 …to purify and strengthen the physical body …and [your] part of the world…[so that] the Essential choice in the physical body, flows and is revealed. In such as way as it permeates the existence of the body, such that it is recognised and revealed in [all] the senses of the body (pleasure). That it recognises in actuality and revealed that ‘Israel and The Holy One… are One’, until the revelation of His Blessed Essence (the True Ego) in all the world (the create ego) which makes a dwelling place for His Actual Blessed Essence in the lower realms. p.121 The essential point in the life of every Jew and that of the Jewish people as a whole throughout all the generations has been: ‘all the days of your life to bring to the Days of Moshiach’ (Brachot 12.b Mishnah), which even more strongly felt in this generation and our era, as has been said on many occasions in the recent period (that we have already finished all the matters and we need only to receive the face of our righteous Moshiach in actuality). p.122 … the inner dimension of the Torah, the aspect of Oil of the Torah, the aspect of the Yichida of the Torah, that through its spreading outwards the Master king Moshiach will come (the aspect of the Yichida of the souls of Israel) and on this it says (Psalms 89:21) ‘I have found my servant David and anointed him with holy oil’. p.123 …The Holy One Blessed Be He in and of Himself is not [restricted to] the limitation, [and] level or form of transcendence –Atzmus and Mahuss - so much so that one cannot call the Holy One Blessed Be He by the name ‘Atzmus and Mahuss’ (since we do not know the meaning of ‘Atzmus’ and the meaning of ‘Mahuss’) but rather ‘The Name’ (simply) that is not within any limitation, level or form or transcendence. And also as it is call (in Yiddish) ‘The One Above’ and its meaning is ‘transcendence’, the intention is not of the form of encompassing elevation (wonder)

328the His Blessed Existence,…and in truth it is impossible to say on it that ‘existence’, ‘idea’ or ‘thing’… p.126 …with the greatest of Israel that know and understand the wonder of Godliness through the negation of all levels and forms – also the connection to The Holy One Blessed Be He is in its completion in such a way that the simple negation of ones existence, the negation of understanding and intellectualising etc, and even the negation of ones existence through the power of self sacrifice, the nullification of [ones] existence, nevertheless even then, he is the one, giving up his life (his will). Which is not the case by children, who are, to begin with…transcend the knowing ‘that there is a God who exists’ –that even this [elementry religious] knowledge children do not have, since it is all there existence, it is recognised in every part of [their lives] in eating and drinking etc,… p.126 …and before this and beyond this [the saying of ‘Modeh Ani’] is the revelation of ones existence, as it is, in and of itself…in the moment that one wakes from sleep, that there is not anything else beside the revelation of ones existence (after the concealment of sleep) which is to be one being with Atzmus and Mahuss, ‘Israel and the Holy One Blessed Be He are One’ exposing the Atzmus and Mahuss that is there. p.128 …in the Future to Come it will be seen in actuality and revealed; the true existence of Israel, [that] the essence of the soul … is One with His Blessed Essence and Being, ‘Israel and the Holy One…are One’. As this infuses and permeates and is revealed in all levels of the [the soul, and all] five names that it is called. In all the powers of the soul, pleasure and will, intellect and emotions in the physical body, in all 248 organs and 365 veins, that it is recognised in them, in actuality, the revelation that ‘Israel and the Holy One…are One’. p.129 … ‘I have found my servant David and anointed him with holy oil’ –‘I have found which this alludes to the essence , ’מצוי - is also from the language of ‘existing ’ מצאתיof the existence that it is beyond form and definition etc, and also [even] beyond the definitions of existence, and only since we [are] required to use…the language ‘existing’, this [therefore] means that, ‘I have found my servant David’ is referring to the Essence of the soul of Moshiach that is beyond form and definition (even beyond the aspect of the general Yichida). That therefore it is called ‘existing’ (‘I have found’); and after this, ‘with Holy oil I anointed him’, that ‘oil’, alludes to the aspect of the general Yichida in the soul of Moshiach, that permeates all things, as in the example of oil that oozes from everything. p.130 … ‘All the days of your life [should be to bring the days of Moshiach]’ means every moment of a person’s life, day and night, awake or asleep… (‘All that breathes praises God’ and ‘with each and every breath a person breathes…’) … And all the days of your life to bring about the days of Moshiach’ means that his life (every instant of it) is bringing the days of Moshiach. That is, a Jew does not limit

329himself only to those times when he thinks or speaks or does something to bring Moshiach. Rather the essence of his life (‘your life’) is to bring the days of Moshiach. p.131 …And all this –is not necessarily in high issues that are tied to the aspect of the Yichida, like the learning and spreading of the teachings of Hassidism, the Yichida of the Torah, but also (and mainly) in simple issues, like the physical necessities of a Jew, which are tied with his essential existence… p.132 …at the time a person sleeps, the higher part and the lower part are equal. From a spiritual perspective, the higher part of a person, [i.e.] his spirituality, is the main part of who he is, the lower part is indicated by his physicality [his body]. From this it is understood that, even though that simply on a revealed level the idea of sleep, where the ‘higher’ (spiritual) becomes equivalent to the ‘lower’ (physical) which is [or at least seems to be] a very great descent (from the perspective of revelations [of consciousness]). Even so, …in its source, and the inner dimension of this idea is …[that] it [is] an even greater elevation; that precisely in that situation [of sleep] there is found the [level of] ‘higher’ together with the ‘lower’ in complete equality. This comes [about] because of the revelation of His Blessed Essence and Being -Atzmusso and Mahusso, which it is totally ‘beyond’ all the boundaries of higher and lower, and compared to Him they are absolutely equal. Similarly to that which is known; that a simple person (which in whom is not shining the [light of] intellect in his mind) is bound up with the simplicity of the Atzmus. p.141 ‘And Jacob awake from his sleep’ that ‘and said ‘surely YHVH is present in this place and [Anochi] I did not know!’ (Genesis 28:11) That the revelation of YHVH (the Essential Name) is higher than the aspect of ‘know[ledge]’. Since knowledge is a limitation [albet] of [the] ‘higher’ [faculties]… which is not the case with regards to Atzmus and Mahuss which above and below are literally equal. p.142 … ‘from the narrow straights, I call unto the Lord’ [and] ‘the Lord answered me with wide expanse’ (Psalms 118:5) –a revelation of the Essential wide expanse of Atzmus and Mahus. While the completion of the purification of the lower comes especially via the revelation of Atzmus which is beyond above and below; the simplicity of Atzmus, which it is connected with and one thing with, the simplicity of a Jew, in the known language ‘Israel and the Holy One Blessed Be He are all One’. p.145 …it is explained in Hassidic philosophy (Torah Ohr V’Yishlach) that Jacob is the aspect of Tikkun and Esau is the aspect of Tohu. And Jacob’s sending of angelic messengers to Esau was because he thought that Esau had already been purified. And therefore [he thought that] it would be possible to join and make One the many [great] Lights (and vessels) of Tohu (Esau) with the (lights and) many [great] vessels of Tikkun. That this is the completion in the purification of the physical world, that it should become a ‘vessel’, and more than this, become One with, in a total Oneness with spirituality. [This takes place] via the revelation of Atzmus which is higher than Tohu and Tikkun. [Thus] it is revealed that in the limitations of Tohu and Tikkun, that

330all issues are a revelation of His Blessed Atzmusso, which with regards to this they are literally One. p.145 …a dwelling place for His Blessedness in the lower realms, for his Essence - Atzmusso. This will happen when in the complete revelation in the true and complete Redemption, ‘when the dross of the body and of the world will be purified, and they will be able to apprehend the revealed Divine light…’ (Tanya end of Chap.36) ‘and the glory of God will be revealed and all flesh shall see that the mouth of God has spoken’ (Isaiah 40:5) that the flesh itself will be Godliness (also see Likkutie Sichos v.8 p.63). That then will be revealed the power of the potential in the actual, so much so that even ‘a stone will call out and recognise’ (Habakkuk 2:11). The actual physical (inanimate (stone), vegetation and animal, and how much more so the body of a man), that physicality itself (that through it is revealed the power of Atzmus)…similarly to ‘female will court [and therefore encompass and transcend] the male’ (Jeremiah 31:21) the soul will draw its nurturance from the body. p.145-6 …is revealed the union and joining of Godliness will the world: through the revelation of the inner dimension of the Torah – the hidden of the Torah –as it is revealed by the teachings of Hassidism, with the union of the hidden of God - the Holy One Blessed Be He with the hidden of Israel. And this gives the potential to transform the lower of the physical world, that it should be a vessel for the revelation of Godliness, for the revelation of the Holy One Blessed Be He, and even the hidden [aspect] of the Holy One… p.146 …on the Sabbath day when the Holiness of the spiritual pleasure of Shabbat (which transcends the world) is drawn into the physicality of the Jew –in ones eating and drinking and sleeping, by this that it is a Mitzvah to get pleasure from eating and drinking, and ‘sleeping on Shabbat is pleasurable’. [The reason] is that the additional soul which is drawn down on Shabbat, makes a change in the nature of the animal soul, even in the nature of the physical body, and even in the physical world. p.151 …it is therefore understood that now, we already have the situation that the physical body and even physicality itself has already been totally purified and cleansed, and is ready a ‘vessel’ for all lights and spiritual matters, including and mainly the light of our righteous Moshiach, the light of the true and complete Redemption. Even [including] the revelation of the simplicity of the Essence of His Blessed Essence and Being, which will be revealed in the simplicity of our righteous Moshiach (which is beyond the aspect of the Yichida and all names, level and influxes etc) as is revealed in the simplicity of every Jew… p.151-2 …And the only thing missing is that a Jew should open his eyes and he should, when he will see that all is ready for the Redemption! There is already the…Set Table [Shulchan Aruch], there is already the Leviathan and the Behemoth and the hidden wine. The Jewish people already sit by the table ‘the table of their Father’ (Brachot 3.a) (the Holy One Blessed Be He), together with our righteous Moshiach. (as it is

331stated in the holy books (Commentary on the Bartenura on Megila Rut) that in every generation there is ‘one descended from Judah who is qualified to be Moshiach’). In our generation this is the leader of the generation, my sainted father-in-law. And now after the passing of my sainted father-in-law we also have already ‘a heart to know and eyes to see and ears to hear’. (Tavo 29:3) (Translation from Besuras HaGeleulo p.156)] p.152 …one must understand, see and hear in the physicality of the world the true and complete Redemption in actual reality. One should learn the Torah of Moshiach (the inner aspects of the Torah) in a way of seeing. All the above is already prepared; one only need open ones eyes to see it! p.152 …and particularly in our times –the Days of Moshiach –which in them we are in now, and we need only to ‘open our eyes’ and then we will see that we already find ourselves in the true and complete Redemption simply, and all the children of Israel, ‘our youth and our elderly etc, our sons and our daughters’ are prepared in every single point ‘coming [to sit] and reclining at the table’…a table set with all good tastes, a table prepared with every delicacy and delight, beginning with those of the Redemption, Leviathan and the Behemoth and hidden wine. Also …the most important thing, ‘to know God’ the world will be filled with the knowledge of the God as the waters cover the ocean bed.’ p.173 (…the advantage of the created self that he feels as if ‘a being unto himself’. This is because this [feeling] comes from His Blessed Essence that ‘His Existence is from Himself - Atzmusso which has no prier cause or affect that preceded Him…) We can say that…in order to accomplish the purification of the very low it has to come from the power of the Essence. Since with regards to the aspect of the revelations –where there is a difference between the higher and the lower, it is only possible to draw down Godliness into a place which is fit for such. This is not the case with the power of the Etzem (which is beyond higher and lower) it is able to purify and refine even in a lowly place which is not a vessel. And furthermore draws down the Essence itself. And so on and so forth; it is especially through the place that is so very low, that is revealed the Etzem, this refers to the purification of all of the world. p.183 …the revelation of the Oil of the Torah … is …also and mainly to quicken and speed up and bring close of the coming of our righteous Moshiach, who is called ‘Moshiach - anointed’, from being anointed with oil, as it is written (Psalms 89:21) ‘with Holy Oil he is anointed’. And through this, [there] is the main and complete revelation of the Oil (rezzin d’rezzin) of the Torah, that is the learning of ‘the secret reasons and hidden mysteries’ (Rashi on Song of Songs 1:2), until ‘in that time (in the Days of Moshiach)…the entire worlds toil will not be, but only to know God alone’. And how much more so, the Children of Israel, that ‘they will be great sages and know hidden things and comprehend their creator’ (Maimonides at the end of Mishnah Torah) This means, that the main learning will be in the secret of the secrets of the Torah. Therefore all that walk and draw close to the revelation of our righteous

332Moshiach, go and add in the revelation of the Oil (secret of the secrets) of the Torah, that this is the ‘reasons [and delights]’ …of the teachings of (Torahso) of Moshiach (Maimonides Hilchos Malchim end of Chap.11). p.201 …simply that it will not happen that there will be a gap God forbid, between ‘all the days of your life’ and ‘the Days of Moshiach’ (which this happened to all the generations before this generation) but rather ‘all the days of your life’ of every Jew, will be in their physical life, all with their souls in their bodies, this will simply also include (also) ‘the Days of Moshiach’ with out a gap, so that the Redemption come imminently and literally now in this moment and in this place…so that then the last moment from Exile and the last point of Exile will be the first moment and first place of the Redemption. p.257 …the innovation of the union of higher and lower is within the limitations of the world which differentiates between higher and lower. [This primary dualism is] so much so that there is a decree and separation between the higher and lower, (higher can not go down to the lower and the lower can not go up to the higher), and [only] at the Giving of the Torah was the decree nullified and was there made a union between the higher and lower. However from the perspective of the level of Godliness which transcends the limitations of higher and lower, [and] has no connection or association with the decree and separation, between the lower… lower and higher are equal even before the Giving of the Torah. And the innovation of the Giving of the Torah is that even within the limitations of the world there is this decree and separation between the higher and the lower. [Nevertheless] there was drawn down the level of Godliness that is beyond the limitations of higher and lower… This innovation is tied up with the service of the Children of Israel (in their fulfilment of Torah and its commandments) to make actual the union between the higher and the lower, but also even before this, there is the essence of a Jew that transcends the Torah (‘the thought of Israel preceded all things’ -Berashis Rabbah Chap.1:4, even the thought of the Torah). That this is the level of the Patriarchs (the source and root and the essence of all the Children of Israel), beginning with Abraham our father (‘One was Abraham’ Ezekiel 32:24)… The innovation of the Giving of the Torah (concerning the Children of Israel and through them also the world) is not only with regards to the [Divine] influx to the lower (that the essence also flows downwards). But it is also (and mainly) with regards to the influx of the essence. Since that, it is precisely through the influx to the lower, [that] the essence is revealed, which is not defined or limited to anything, and there it is able to flow to all places. p.260 …Even though that at the Giving of the Torah there was the revelation of the Name YHVH, as it is written ‘they know that I am God’ nevertheless, since that ‘in the Future to Come it is written (VaYetzeh 28:21) and YHVH will be unto me as Elohim, that the revelation will be from a much greater height. So much so that, the Name YHVH will be considered only like Elohim’ and there will be reveal an even higher Name YHVH, ‘the main issue of the great Name’ (Torah Ohr Shemos 50,3).

333It is thus, that even the place and situation after the Giving of the Torah, was in such a way as ‘the name of YHVH is not known to me’ compared to the revelation of the Name YHVH of the Future to Come. That then there will be an innovation in the general idea of the Giving of the Torah, ‘a new Torah will go forth from Me’ that then there will be the completion of the marriage of the congregation of Israel and the Holy One… p.262 …it is possible to say that the completion of the revelation of the Name YHVH in the Future to Come (which it is incomparable to the revelation of the Name YHVH which was at the revelation of the Giving of the Torah, that it is the aspect of ‘the Name YHVH was not made known to them’) p.263 …there is a continuation of the fulfilment of the Torah and its commandments (and on the contrary in a completion that is even higher ‘like commandments according to Your will’) and particularly, that which is known, that Mitzvoth are not nullified in the Future to Come (even after the resurrection of the dead) (see at length p.27 and on, 5752 ‘The Laws of the Oral Torah will never be nullified’). p.274 …furthermore, the ‘that was uncovered and revealed many types of all lights (Zohar Chadash 1,10.a) [which] come especially from His Blessed Essence and Being (and in the language of the Zohar ‘the House of Pharaoh etc, a house that uncovered and revealed many type of all light etc, the Holy One Blessed Be He breaks through all the lights etc’ that in a house (a dwelling) there the king is revealed in all his Essence). p.282 …there was a unique instruction and [with it] a unique potential from the One Above to Moses –‘and God said to Moses Come unto Pharaoh’, ‘beyond the Holy One glory after glory’: His Blessed Atzmusso- which is higher than (the entire definition of) infinite and finite –leading Moses in to Pharaoh. That also being a soul in a limited body Moses can receive the revelation of ‘the uncovering of all the lights’ of His Blessed Atzmusso! p.283 …the revelation of ‘Pharaoh’, ‘the uncovering of all lights’ of His Blessed Essence, and furthermore that a soul in a body can actually go into (‘come unto Pharaoh’), ‘glory after glory’, in to the innerness and inside it literally. p.284 …with regards to the highest levels of Godliness those of Atzmus and Mahus, it is that the physical body, in this physical world, should be Holy, to become a dwelling place for Him may He be blessed, that all the world will be in a state of ‘Israel and the Holy One…are all One’. p.285 …therefore it is understood that in the exile of Egypt and the going out of Egypt –there was a foretaste of the revelation of Atzmus below. [From which] came the Giving of the Torah – it is expresses the preperation of the nullification of the decree, [that is] the overall situation of separation between the higher and lower, to the

334situation of Oneness between them, all prepared for the complete Oneness between them at the Giving of the Torah itself. It is possible to say that the main part of this happened via God’s instruction to Moses ‘Come unto Pharaoh’, as has been explained. p.285 (…‘and you shall be unto me a congregation of priests and a holy nation’ (Yitro 19:6), this that we should be a ‘nation’ is in this physical world, we should be ‘holy’, to the level of ‘a congregation of priests’ –‘High Priests’, which a High Priest has to be complete both in his body and in his possessions, and even in his cloths ‘to glorify and to beautify’), so that when Jews are all souls in bodies they are ‘all One’ with the One Above. p.287 …and as is known from the ruling of Law (from Nachmonides –Shar Hagmul) that the ultimate reward and (consequentially) the completion of all matters is precisely with souls in their bodies in the resurrection of the dead (and not with the souls without bodies, like the opinion of Maimonides –Hichos Teshuvah Chap.8 Halocha 1 and 2) –on the contrary –in the Future to Come the soul will be nourished from the body. p.289 …in the true and complete Redemption, when then also ‘snake’ – ‘the big crocodile’ (Pharaoh) – will be[come] a ‘great sun’ (Sanhedrin 52.b) of Holiness. p.290 …and the revelation of ‘come unto Pharaoh’ comes to the leader of the generation –which ‘the leader is the all’ (Rashi on Chookas 21.21) –which [then] flows and is revealed below… p.291 …the last generation of Exile and the first generation of the Redemption, which that generation (of the footsteps of Moshiach) is a reincarnation of the generation that went out of Egypt (Shar HaGilgulim preface 20 and Sefer Ha Likuttim of the Ari z’l Shemot 3:4), and therefore it is understood and is made even more clear [the connection between]…the leader of the generation (the Moses of the generation) with Moses in his generation – as our sages mention ( ר� Chap.2. a4 and 6 )that Moses שמו‘he is the first redeemer and the last redeemer’. p.291 …it is the highest time for the true and complete Redemption! And to explain, that in the language of ‘highest time’ is hinted to the [main] purpose of the Redemption – a ‘time’, which is tied up with measurements and limitation (past present and future), that the ‘highest (time)’, in such as way as there is no higher than it. This means that the limitation (time) itself become infinite (highest), in such a way that they are one thing literally, similarly to that which we have discussed about the ‘uncovering of all the lights’. p.295 …the service of spreading out of Torah and Judaism and the spreading of the wellsprings outwards, in a way of ‘come unto Pharaoh’ make every Jew a vessel to

335receive the ‘uncovering of all the lights’ of …the revealed part of Torah and the inner dimension of the Torah… p.296 …the Redemption itself- as it is explained in the books of Kabbalah and Hassidism, that in the Future to Come there will be revealed the advantage of the Sephirah of Malchut (receiving, woman) that its source is above all the Sephirot (giving/flowing/male) as it is written, ‘the female will court the male’ (Jeremiah 31:21), ‘a virtuous woman is a crown to her husband’ (Proverbs 12:4). p.300 … ‘a land of wheat, barely, grape, fig, and pomegranate; a land of olive oil and date-honey’(Deuteronomy 8:8)…and this is (particularly) relevant to the fruits of Torah, which teaches us of the pleasure that is in the Torah, the inner dimension of the Torah (which is uniquely felt with the ‘honey’ which hints to the inner dimension of Torah) that the main revelation is in the ‘new Torah that will come from Me’ in the Future to Come. p.318 …in addition to the Song that is tied up with the elevation from below to above, there has to be now, (after the finish of all the elevations) the Song which is because of the attachment (Dekakut) and inclusion in the Transcendent, a preparation for and a taste of the ‘New Song’ of the Future to Come. p.320 Sefer HaSichos 5752 -1992 Volume 2 …the choice of the One Above in every Jew, and especially in the body of a Jew, that a soul in a physical body in this physical world shall be ‘a congregation of priests and a holy nation’. p.384 … ‘Gold’ –this means that also in the world where physical desires take up space, is every Jew a wealthy person, both spiritually and physically! …and at the time when a Jew is himself meditating, it brings him to an even greater joy, and such a joy, that it actually effects his physical life [and the mode of living], which he lives in this world …at the time a person is happy –he lives independently in a joyous life- a happiness that …brings him success in everything he does in his entire life… p.388 …that every Jew is at least connected with [the idea of] ‘gold’. And simply that every Jew must have wealth, both in spirituality and in physicality, wealth simply literally! p.389 …every Jew with a wealth of physical and spiritual gold, in such a way as (that which happened ‘as in the days of your going out of Egypt… I will show you wonders’) that ‘there was not one of Israel who did not have 90 camels ladened with the …wealth and gold of Egypt’ p.390

336 …and it is hinted to in the name of the month ‘Adar’ ‘Aleph –Dor (Yiddish), –[i.e.] Aleph - One-Here which hints to the flow and revelation of the ‘Aleph’ (the Master of the World) in the world, in order that it should be a dwelling place bellow. p.399

337

Annotated Bibliography

Primary It should be noted that, with the exception of a small series of note books, letters and responsa, the primary textual material that we have to date comes from the Rebbe’s orally delivered lectures and discourses. These were originally said in Yiddish and Hebrew, often with lengthy quotes in Aramaic, or usually an amalgam of all three languages, and were written down by his followers and secretariat. Many of these discourses were eventually proofread and edited by the Rebbe himself and are, therefore, the most valuable and legitimate primary source material. There are some books that attempt to collect and translate these texts into thematic collections on different subjects. There are those that I believe attempt to remain authentic to the original and there are others, which are so remote from the original that it is often difficult to see the connection between the Rebbe’s original discourse and the translator’s version. I have therefore felt it necessary to divide this material into two in different categories, the first being Primary and the latter Primary-Secondary. There were things said in private audiences called Yechidus, and other personal accounts and stories that are more difficult to objectively verify and would also have to be considered Primary-Secondary. There are seven possible categories of primary Hebrew and Yiddish textual source material that one comes across when looking holistically at the philosophy of the Lubavitcher Rebbe. These are: -

Schneerson, Rabbi Menachem. M. Sefer Hitvadiyos. 770 Eastern Parkway, New York: Vaad Hinuch (1983).

Which have also been republished under the title Torahs Menachem Hisva’adiyos:

Schneerson, Rabbi Menachem. M. Torahs Menachem Hisva’adiyos, New York: Lahak Hanochos, (1992).

The majority of the texts that we have are a mixture of edited and unedited talks, stories and personal accounts, some of which were not captured on tape, owing to them having taken place on Shabbat or other religious festivals (when the use of electrical equipment is prohibited), but were written down by a group of individuals with superb aural memory. Each would remember an hour or so, possibly more, and then at the conclusion of the Shabbat or festival would repeat what they had heard. These would later be transcribed, whether lectures Sichos or inspired discourses Maamorim, thereby capturing the majority of the Rebbe’s talks, much of which were later to be edited by the Rebbe or his editorial staff.

These fifty or so volumes include many talks that were said during these gatherings, and remain unedited by the Rebbe’s hand, and provide a written version of events, and of what was actually said, prior to any further editorial processes.

338 Out of the unedited conglomeration of ‘inspired’ discourses and talks, which are found in the Sefer Hitvadiyos, there are another set of books called Sichos Kodesh:

Schneerson, Rabbi Menachem. M. Sichos Kodesh. New York: Anonymous Publisher (1986).

These books are gleaned from Sefer Hitvadiyos and arranged into a thematic and systematic collection of talks and discourses or Sichos, for that particular week or gathering. Once again these remain largely unedited, that is, they did not undergo the Rebbe’s rigorous editorial process. The next genre called Maamorim are the ‘inspired’ oral discourses, usually only said by a ‘Rebbe’ in his role as spiritual leader and figurehead. Many of these were eventually edited by the Rebbe and published in a series of six books called Sefer Ha Maamorim Meluket .

Schneerson, Rabbi Menachem. M. Sefer Ha’Maamorim Meluket Vols 1-6 New York: Kehot Publication Society. (1994).

But as mentioned these works are said to be inspired and are held in a different light from the next category, which are Sichos.

Schneerson, Rabbi Menachem. M. Likkutei Sichos Vol. 1-39. New York: Kehot Publication Society. (1999).

These are the general talks and discussions, whether around a specifically Hasidic topic or more general Rabbinic, Biblical or even political one. These are said to be the works of the Rebbe himself, that is of his personality but they are not considered specifically ‘inspired’.

The next series of the same genre are categorised chronologically from the years 1987-1992, and are almost identical to the Likkutei Sichos but within each book they alternate between Hebrew and Yiddish and are called Sefer HaSichos, the following are just two examples:

Schneerson, Rabbi Menachem. M. Sefer HaSichos, 5752. (set), Vols.1-2. New York: Kehot Publication Society. (1993). Schneerson, Rabbi Menachem. M. Sefer Ha Sichot, 5751. (set) Vols 1-2. New York: Kehot Publication Society. (1998).

There are also approximately fifty volumes of the Rebbe’s letters to people and organisations throughout the world, over the forty-two years he was able to write or dictate them. These are called Igros Kodesh.

Schneerson, Rabbi Menachem. M. Igros Kodesh. Vols 1-46. New York: Kehot Publication Society. (1989).

339As mentioned earlier this large set of chronologically and thematically collected letters and responsa reveal a fascinating world of ideas and expose some underlying beliefs and aspects of the Rebbe’s personality that would otherwise be lost in a reading of his more traditional lectures or discourses.

His personal notebooks or Reshimos have recently been published in book form called Reshimos.

Schneerson, Rabbi Menachem M. Reshimos. New York Kehot Publication Society. (2002).

This set of personal writings appeared almost immediately after the Rebbe’s passing in a series of small pamphlets and were released every few weeks. The executers of the Rebbe’s estate claim that these notes were purposefully left by the Rebbe in the drawer of his writing desk to be found and published, after his passing.

Other primary sources that are equally valid are audio and video recordings.

Authentic Translations

Schneerson, Rabbi Menachem. M. Anticipating the Redemption –Maamarim of the Lubavitcher Rebbe, Rabbi Menachem M Schneerson. Trans R. Eliyahu Touger & R. Sholem Ber Wineberg, New York: Sichos in English. (1994).

This book, and the other volumes that followed it, collect the Rebbe’s main and most famous Maamarim concerning Redemption and Moshiach, into what can be considered a relatively authentic English translation. Overall, these appeared just before the Rebbe’s passing in response to growing interest in the subject, which came from the Rebbe’s instruction to learn more about these issues.

Schneerson, Rabbi Menachem. M. Besuras HaGeulo: The Announcement of the Redemption. Trans. Rabbi Yisroel Heschel Greenburg and Rabbi Yisroel Ber Kaufman. New York. Vaad L’hafotzas Sichos. (1998).

This is an almost verbatim translation of the Hebrew and Yiddish volume that shares its name (originally printed in 1993), which is an edited and ‘sound bite’ synopsis of a variety of Messianic Sichos and Maamorim from 1990-1992.

Schneerson, Rabbi Menachem. M. From Exile to Redemption, Volumes 1-2. Compiled by R. Alter Eliyahu Friedman. Trans. Uri Kaploun. New York: Kehot Publication Society. (1996).

These are selected excerpts from many different Sichos and Maamorim that deal with some of the issues raised with regard to the Messianic idea within Lubavitch philosophy in general, and the Rebbe in particular. The collection deals with ideas

340thematically and gathers together some very surprising teachings on the subject. Nonetheless, in discussion with Rabbi Uri Kaploun, he agreed that the even more controversial material had been purposefully left out.

Schneerson, Rabbi Menachem M. On the Essence of Chassidus. Trans R. Y.H. Greenberg and S.S. Handelman. New York: Kehot Publication Society. (1986).

This is said to be ‘the definitive explanation of the idea of Hasidic philosophy…in intellectual and systematic terms…’, and although it is thoroughly interesting, it is a beautiful example of the Rebbe’s complicated use of circular logic. It is also possible that the Rebbe personally assisted in the editing and publishing of this English volume.

Schneerson, Rabbi Menachem. M. Proceeding Together, The Earliest Talks of the Lubavitcher Rebbe, Rabbi Menachem M Schneerson. Trans R. Uri Kaploun, New York: Sichos in English (1995).

This appeared almost directly after the Rebbe’s passing and was an attempt by the authors to console the followers, and to redirect their attention from the more messianic publications to the earlier and less messianic discourses. This book is the first in a series of the Rebbe’s early lectures 1950-51, and discusses the passing of the previous Rebbe. I feel this was meant to provide acceptable language of grief, as well as re-legitimising the belief in a posthumous messiah in a language which the Rebbe had himself used.

Schneerson, Rabbi Yosef. Y. and Schneerson Rabbi Menachem M. Basi LeGani Chassidic Discourses. Trans R. Eliyahu Touger & R. Sholom B. Wineberg, New York: Kehot Publication Society. (1990).

This is an English translation of both the Previous Rebbe’s last discourse and the Rebbe’s first and inaugural discourse that he spoke, then edited and published with additions in 1951. This discourse is of major significance and is an important resource when examining the Rebbe’s messianism.

Solomon, Aryeh; Solomon, Louis David. The Educational Teachings of Rabbi Menachem M. Schneerson. North Vale, NJ: Jason Aronson. (2000).

This book was perhaps one of the first to discuss the Rebbe’s teachings in a relatively academic fashion. However, its style and content is rather dull. There seems to be an over emphasis on statistics, e.g. how many times the Rebbe may have mentioned an idea over a particular period. This book includes graphs and pie charts.

341Touger, Eliyahu. Crown Jewels: Conceptual Frontiers of Chassidic Thought. New York: Sichos in English. (1998).

Explores some of the Rebbe’s more interesting and intriguing discourses. Here, Rabbi Touger has attempted to be authentic and true to the Rebbe’s original discourses. In doing so however, it still retains the problem of being a difficult read for those not familiar with its format.

Primary-Secondary –Adaptations and Exegesis There is also a vast amount of secondary source material produced by the Rebbe’s followers, which helps to shed light on the way the Rebbe’s ideas were understood within the community and also to understand possible shifts in emphasis or ideology within the movement. This whole category can be described as ‘Primary-Secondary’ source material. From the perspective of how this information was understood within the context of the movement they would fall into the category of ‘primary’ source material. However, it is to be considered ‘secondary’ only in as much as the works are generally adaptations of the Rebbe’s original texts and talks. Within this category itself there are two distinctive areas; the first is ‘adaptations’ as has already been mentioned, and the second is ‘biography’. Some of the items listed below express the way the Rebbe’s ideas were understood as well as the general beliefs and world view of the Lubavitch movement: -

(Annonymous) And He Will Redeem Us – Moshiach in our times. New York: Mendelsohn Press (1994).

Originally published in Hebrew, this was the first professionally presented version of the messianic views post Gimmel Tammuz (the Hebrew date of the Rebbe’s passing). It presents some of the Rebbe’s lesser known discourses and quotations in English (some of which I have used in this thesis) interspersed with full colour glossy photos of the Rebbe carrying out all manner of mitzvos. What this does is to introduce the English reader to the heart and soul of the Lubavitch messianic beliefs, all the while enforcing the idea that the Rebbe was a bastion of traditional Judaism.

Anonymous B’emuna Shlaima – The Sources about Moshiach and Redemption. (Hebrew) Anonymous pamphlet, Jerusalem (1997).

This pamphlet primarily attempts to prove that the Rebbe was and is Moshiach and encourage others to believe in his messianic potential, and, in some cases even after his passing.

(Annonymous) Hatekufa v’HaGeula –b’mishnato shell haRebi m’Lubavitch. (Hebrew) K’far Chabad, Israel. (1999).

This composed, intelligent and well presented book puts forwards a thoughtful and enlightening view of the Rebbe’s messianism. In contrast to most of the messianic publications printed in support of the Rebbe’s status as Moshiach, this book provides

342a calm and straightforward view of many of the issues at the heart of Lubavitch messiainism.

Boteach, Rabbi Shmuel. The Wolf Shall Lie with the Lamb: The Messiah in Hasidic Thought. Pennsylvania: Jason Aronson (1993).

Although this is an interesting book, and its contents provide the reader with a basic background to the subject, it is questionable whether any of its content reflects the actual teachings of the Rebbe, or is more representative of the general ideological background against which the Rebbe’s ideas should be understood.

Boteach, Rabbi Shmuel. Moses of Oxford. London: Andre Deutsch (1994). 2 volumes.

This set of books sprawls across a wide variety of contemporary Jewish and moral issues, and icludes several chapters on Lubavitch messianism.

Branover, Herman. The Lubavitcher Rebbe on Science and Technology. New York: B'Or HaTorah. (1995).

This essay provides valuable information about attitudes towards science and technology within the Lubavitch movement, and although it is based on the talks of the Rebbe, there are one or two points of interpretation where I would disagree with the author.

Brod, Menachem M. The Days of Moshiach, The Redemption and the Coming of Moshiach in Jewish Sources. Published by Chabad Youth Organisation, K’far Chabad, Israel. (1993) (original Hebrew 1992).

This was one of the first books that attempted to present some of the Rebbe’s ideas on Moshiach in a relatively comprehensive manner, yet in a style accessible even to children. It was the circular logic of one of the opening paragraphs of the introduction that initially triggered my questioning of this self-serving logic.

Butman, Shmuel. Countdown to Moshiach: Can the Rebbe Still Be Moshiach? New York; International Campaign to Bring Moshiach. (1995).

This small book, was written with passion and conviction and it captures the primary thought and arguments within the Lubavitch messianic movement. It is set out in a question and answer format and the author uses many quotes from the Rebbe to convey his views. Its main focus is on proving that, the belief in the Rebbe as a posthumous messiah, is not only legitimate within Judaism, but the declaration of such a belief is paramount in bringing the actual redemption.

Dubov, Nissan Dovid. To Live and Live Again. New York: Sichos in English. (1995).

343This book, which was published after the Rebbe’s passing, focuses on the Jewish belief in resurrection, and attempts to set the tone of the future Lubavitch messianic movement, even though the author is not particularly messianic.

Freeman, Tzvi. Bringing Heaven Down to Earth, 365 Meditations, from The Wisdom of the Rebbe, Menachem Mendel Schneerson. Vancouver/Berkeley: Class One Press. (1996).

This book is an interesting New Age spin on the Rebbe’s teachings in general, and in contrast to the other adaptations is quite refreshing, although it too, on the whole, avoids any issues that are too controversial. It appeared quite some time after the Rebbe’s passing and reflects at least one aspect of the general direction of the Rebbe’s last teachings, which was towards the New Age spiritual market. However, I have serious doubts about the authenticity of some of the translations.

Greenglass R. Menachem Zeev and R. Yehudah Leib Groner, Sefer HaMinhagim. New York: Kehot Publishing Society, (1966); also Sefer HaMinhagim: The Book of Chabad-Lubavitch Customs, trans Uri Kaploun (English Edition) New York: Kehot Publication Society (1991).

This is the offical guide to the religious customs of the Chabad-Lubavitch movement. It is an extremely detailed guide to the Rebbe’s ritual observances, which the movement has largely adopted.

Jacobson, Simon, Towards a Meaningful Life: The Wisdom of the Rebbe, Menachem Mendel Schneerson. Published by Vaad Hanochos Hatmimim. William Morrow, New York (1995).

This is an earlier and slightly more sensible approach to marketing the Rebbe’s teaching for global consumption. It is very easy to read and does not shake or question any of the current societal norms of Middle America.

Levin, Faitel. Heaven On Earth, New York: Kehot Publication Society, (2002).

This is quite possibly the most important theological book ever to have been published by the official Lubavitch publishing society Kehot. Levin documents in an awkward but at times lyrical English the paradoxical nature of the Rebbe’s theology. It was published on the anniversary of what would have been the Rebbe’s 100th birthday, which this makes it an authoritive expression of the movement’s beliefs. The author goes possibly further than I would have otherwise gone in expounding the extreme nature of the Rebbe’s theology that transforms the world into God.

Loewenthal, Naftali. Paradox of Redemption, in Perspectives on Jewish Thought and Mysticism. London. Harwood Academic Publishers. (1994).

344

This article may open the door to a better understanding of the subject, but personally I found the bibliography of more use than the contents of the article.

Sacks, Jonathan. Torah Studies: Discourses by the Lubavitcher Rebbe. New York: Kehot Publication Society. (1996).

The chief Rabbi of England published this impressive work, which attempts to relate the Rebbe’s novel insights on each week’s Torah reading. The reason why this is important is not so much because of the content, but because of the author. Rabbi Sacks is unembarrassed by his intimate connection with the Rebbe and the Lubavitch movement.

Schneerson Menachem M. Kuntras Tzaddik L’Melech. (Hebrew) Ufarasta K’far Chabad (1992).

This pamphlet printed in honour of the Rebbe’s ninetieth year includes a collection of the Rebbe’s discourses and letters. This also includes obscure biographical material some of which the editor suggests indicates that the Rebbe was Moshiach or believed that he was Moshiach.

Schochet, Jacob Immanuel. Living with Moshiach. New York: Kehot Publication Society. (1999).

This small but delightful book attempts to reveal the Moshiach theme within every Sedra portion of the Torah. It captures the Rebbe’s messianic approach to the Torah portion. Schochet is not a particularly pro-messianic writer, so references to the Rebbe’s messinaic potential seem to be rather scarce.

Schochet, Jacob Immanuel. Moshiach - The Principles of Moshiach and the Messianic Era in Jewish Law and Tradition. New York: Sichos in English (1992).

A small, concise and valuable book that points towards the major sources within traditional Judaism that discuss different aspects of the messianic idea. However, it was not widely used by the Lubavitch movement after the Rebbe’s passing, because it quotes Miamonides’ statement that the messiah must be alive.

Stone, Abraham. Highlight of Moshiach. New York: Sichos in English. (1992).

This very short book is exactly what its title says it is. It is a very sparse introduction to general Jewish approaches to the subject of Moshiach and the Redemption. However, since it has been published by a Lubavitch organisation, the slant fits the Rebbe’s general conception of both.

345Touger, Rabbi Eliyahu, As a New Day Breaks. New York Sichos in English (1993)

This is one of the first books to be written about the subject of Moshiach, which includes recent historical events as signs of the coming redemption, and as attestations of the dawn of a new era, a fundamental change in the world. This provides a wonderful insight into the nature and mentality of at least one levelheaded yet optimistic Lubavitcher before the Rebbe’s passing.

Touger, Eliyahu. Eyes Upon the Land. - The Territorial Integrity of Israel. New York: Sichos in English. 2001.

The Rebbe definitely had strong views on the Land of Israel and the problems facing both the Israelis and Palestinians. He believed that it was important that the Jews in Israel were proud Jews, and he also believed in the strategic importance of maintaining the borders of Israel. This small book attempts to summarise these views, highlighting meetings with heads of state and statements that the Rebbe made regarding these issues. However, I’m not convinced that this book is the last word on the Rebbe’s view on the Land and State of Israel.

Touger, Eliyahu. From Dawn to Daylight. New York: Sichos in English. 2001.

Here Touger allows himself free rein to think and speculate on the nature of Moshiach and the dawning of the new era. The book is a touching and delicate attempt to make sense of it all, and is proof that although the movement may have been disheartened by the Rebbe’s passing, it did not necessarily stop its desire to bring the messianic era, but may have perhaps forced it to become more introspective.

Touger, Eliyahu. I Await His Coming Everday. New York: Kehot Publication Society. 1991.

This small, book is a discussion of the Rebbe’s view and understanding of Maimonides’ laws concerning the coming of Moshiach. It is an invaluable and basic introduction to the Rebbe’s views on the subject.

Touger, Eliyahu. In God We Trust - A handbook of Values for Americans. New York: Sichos in English. 1996.

Originally published as a wedding gift within the movement, this is a strange mishmash of stories, presidential letters and moral lessons, which is loosely based around the Rebbe’s posthumous award of the Congressional Gold Medal, the Rebbe’s favourable attitude towards America and his advice to the country.

346Touger, Rabbi Eliyahu, Seek out the Welfare of Jerusalem, New York: Sichos in English. (1994).

This is yet another of Rabbi Eliyahu Touger’s many adaptations, and although this book is of some interest, since it discusses the laws and intricacies of the Rebbe’s teaching on Rambam’s rulings on the building of the Beit HaMikdosh (the Temple), I am doubtful if these adaptations can be relied upon as authentic and, therefore, as primary expressions of the Rebbe’s teachings.

Touger Rabbi Eliyahu, and Edited by Uri Kaploun. Sound the Great Shofar, Essays on the Imminence of Redemption. New York: Kehot Publication Society (1992).

This is one of the earlier books to attempt to deal with issues concerning ‘the Imminence of the Redemption’. This was published at a time when the Rebbe’s ideas were still not fully understood within the movement. It is therefore of some interest, but is a poorly written and incoherent example of early attempts to coherently formulate the Rebbe’s messianic teaching.

Ginsburg, Rabbi Levi Yitzchak, L’havi L’yomot haMoshiach. (Hebrew) Anonymous, pamphlet, Israel (1995).

This pamphlet is a commentary on two of the Rebbe’s discourses. The first, Achron Shel Pesach 1987 and the second, the Maamar ‘And the spirit of God rested on him’, 1975. He points to these discourses and the issues they raise to prove that the Rebbe was Moshaich.

Ginsburg, Rabbi Yitzchak, Hitcashrus l’acher Gimmel Tammuz, (Pamphlet) (Hebrew) Linda Pinsky Publications, Rechovot Israel (1998)

This pamphlet attempts to argue that it is possible to still have a connection to the Rebbe even after his passing. This, the author suggests is available via studying his teachings and dedicating oneself completely to him.

Ginsburg, Rabbi Yitzchak, Geulah (Pamphlet) (Hebrew) Gal Einai, Jerusalem (1996).

This pamphlet describes in heady detail, one of the Rebbe’s ideas that the difference between Exile Gola and Redemption Geulah was the addition the letter Alef (which represents the Oneness of God). The author explains what this all means with the aid of his own personal variety of Kabbalism.

Posner, Abraham Baruch. Al Ha-Tzaddikim. The Qualities of Tzaddikim in General and Particularly How the Holy One Dwells in Them. (Hebrew) K’far Chabad, Israel. (1992).

347Out of all the books I have come across this has to be the most interesting, and from a theological perspective, one of the most important. It is a commentary and interpretation of the concept of the indwelling of God and the divine presence in the person of the Tzaddik. Moreover, it is based on the teachings of the Lubavitcher Rebbe, and therefore is very significant when analysing and dealing with the issue of the divination and deification of the Rebbe within the movement. Although as previously mentioned in chapter 10, I do not believe that such an acute emphasis on ‘the Rebbe as God’ is at all representative of the Rebbe’s actual theology.

Valperan, Rabbi Sholom Dovbear HaLevi, Mevasser Tov. K’far Chabad Israel: ‘Ufaratzta’. (circa 1993: no date is actually listed).

This book is a series of questions and answers around the subject of the Rebbe’s messianic teachings as well as the behaviour of some of his followers. Rabbi Valperan used to belong to the Satmar Hasidim and now is a very strong defender of Lubavitch, even when it seems in contradiction to normative halachic rulings. It is very interesting to see what questions are raised, answered and included in this book.

Valperan, Rabbi Sholom Dovbear HaLevi, Yechi HaMelech HaMoshiach. Published by Rabbi Sholom Dovbear Ha Levi Valperan. Israel (1992)

This book is the second and revised follow up of ‘Yechi HaMelech’ which was stopped from being published by the Rebbe in the mid 1980’s. However ‘Yechi HaMelech HaMoshiach’ with the Rebbe’s approval soon became one of the many cornerstones of messianic teaching in the messianic Lubavitch Yeshivot. It is also a series of questions and answers that attempts to prove that the Rebbe is the long awaited Messiah. It is fascinating, impassioned and indicative of the ideas that were within the Chabad Lubavitch movement just before the Rebbe’s passing, and may still be circulating.

Hagiographical and Biographical Sources

(Anonymous). Paths of Providence. Sixtieth Anniversary of The Arrival of the Rebbe and Rebbetzin to the United States. New York: Sichos in English. (2001).

This pamphlet describes the activities surrounding the Rebbe’s arrival in the United States, and provides other information about the Rebbe and his wife.

(Anonymous). The Rebbe - Thirty Years of Leadership. Jerusalem: The Committee for Publishing the 30 Year Jubilee Book. (1980).

This is highly hagiographical, but documents the progression of the Rebbe’s leadership and provides evidence of how the Rebbe slowly transformed the movement from the 1950’s to the 1980’s.

348(Anonymous). Wonders And Miracles: Stories of the Lubavitcher Rebbe, K’far Chabad Israel: Maareches Ufaratzta. (1993).

This book and its sequels were a much more basic and unrefined version of Touger’s To Know and To Care. Although no author claims responsibility for it, it is good example of the general mythology attached to the Rebbe and his personality.

Dalfin, Chaim. Conversations with the Rebbe, Menachem Mendel Schneerson. LA: JEC Publishing company (1996).

The author interviews a number of interesting people who all had either personal contact with the Rebbe or were influenced and affected in some way by his personality. They offer the reader an insight into the type of man the Rebbe was, including aspects of his personality and relationships that were previously unknown.

Deutsch, Shaul Shimon. Larger than Life: The life and times of the Lubavitcher Rebbe Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson, Volumes 1 and 2. New York: Chasidic Historical Productions (1997).

In documenting, the biography of the Rebbe, this book has been my main source. It is a fascinating account of previously undocumented years of the Rebbe’s life, and although aspects of it offer a less than objective perspective, overall it is an extremely valuable and relatively reliable source of information.

Hoffman, Edward. Despite All Odds - The Story of Lubavitch. New York: Simon & Schuster. (1991).

This book is an interesting, relatively modern account of Lubavitch as it was in the late 80’s, but is extremely biased and paints a very sanitised version of the movement.

Laufer, Mordechai Menasheh. Yemai HaMelech – The Days of the King. (Hebrew) New York: Kehot Publication Society. (1991).

This biography of the Rebbe is the official version of events; it does at times conflict with Deutsch’s Larger Than Life, and does not go into much detail about he Rebbe’s early years. It is nonetheless the standard biography, which has been the cornerstone of most of the subsequent biographical works on the Rebbe, of which there are very few.

Touger, Eliyahu and Malka, To Know and to Care, An Anthology of Chassidic Stories about the Lubavitcher Rebbe, Rabbi Menachem M. Schneerson. New York Sichos In English. (1994).

349This appeared before the Rebbe’s passing at the height of the messianic anticipation that filled the Lubavitch community and much of the Jewish world. The cover portrays the Rebbe in an almost superhuman figure standing on the roof of ‘770’ (the main Lubavitch synagogue), and clearly plays with one of the well known statements made by the Rebbe, that Moshiach will be standing on the roof of the miniature sanctuary in the Diaspora. The book’s content is a relatively well written documentation of personal accounts and miracle stories concerning the Rebbe and his relationship with his followers. In some cases the book attempts to be objective about these myths and tales about the Rebbe, some of which did not have miraculous and/or happy endings.

Context within Chabad

There is a whole category of books that help to both historically and philosophically contextualise the Rebbe’s messianic teachings from within the history of the Chabad movement itself, some of which are listed below.

(Anonymous). Challenge, an encounter with Lubavitch-Chabad. The Lubavitch Foundation of Great Britain. London (1970).

(Anonymous). Challenge, an encounter with Lubavitch-Chabad in Israel. The Lubavitch Foundation of Great Britain. London (1970).

Both of these books document the global Lubavitch movement and its development both in Israel and the United Kingdom. They are both a rich and fascinating historical document filled with ideas and philosophies, which helped to fuel the movement’s success in the 1960’s and 1970’s.

Avtzon, Sholom DovBer. The Tanya, Its Story. New York: Rabbi Sholom D. Avtzon. (1999).

This small but interesting book describes how the Tanya came into existence, and the difficulties and complications of printing the Tanya. It is packed with useful historical information and includes details of the Alter Rebbe’s imprisionment and release.

Boteach, Shmuel. Wisdom, Understanding and Knowledge: Basic Concepts of Hasidic Thought. New Jersey: Jason Aronson (1996).

In this book Rabbi Boteach has selected, translated and adapted Reb Yoel Kahn’s encyclopaedia of Hasidic philosophy, Sefer Ha'arachim. This is a good and thorough introduction to major themes of the Rebbe’s thought.

350Dalfin, Chaim. Demystifying the Mystical - Understanding the language and concepts of Chasidism and Jewish Mysticism – a primer for laymen. New Jersey: Jason Aronson (1994).

This book is for laymen. It often unsuccessfully attempts to clarify deep ideas of Hasidic thought, but more often than not makes things either more simplistic than they actually are, or more complicated and confusing.

Green, Yekutiel. Love and Unity in the light of Chassidus. Israel: Yekutiel Green. (1996).

This is an inspiring collection of Hasidic sayings and teachings on the theme of Love and Unity a theme repeated incessantly throughout the book. However, the style of English used, seems to suggest that it may have originally been written in Hebrew and then disastrously translated into English.

Ginsburg, Yitzchak. Awakening the Spark Within. Israel: Linda Pinsky Publications. (2001).

Ginsburg is a wonderfully logical Kabbalist, his ideas are deep, inspiring and insightful. It deals with Hasidic and Kabbalistic ideas about leadership. This book is filled with the author’s unique style of Kabbalistic exegesis.

Ives, Rabbi Yossi, Seder Hishtalshus. London: Yossi Ives Publications, (2001). This is a deep and engrossing work, which describes in detail the ‘Chaining Down of Worlds’. This conceptual journey starts from ‘before’ the Godhead and eventually leads down via the four primary spiritual realms, to the creation of the physical world. This is an important work for anyone wanting to enrich their understanding of Hasidic metaphysics.

Locks, Gutman. There is One. Jerusalem. Gutman Locks, 24 Chabad St, Old City. (1993).

Locks, Gutman. The Raging Mind. Jerusalem. Gutman Locks, 24 Chabad St, Old City, (2000).

Gil Locks, known as ‘Guru Gil’, used to be a Guru in India and in New York where he met the Rebbe and eventually became an orthodox Jew. These two books reveal a fascinating insight into the possibilities of interpretation and understanding of some of the Rebbe’s ideas as they might be understood outside of the Lubavitch movement, and their similarity to more Eastern forms of religious philosophy.

Kaminetzky, Yosef Y. Days in Chabad - Historic events of the dynasty of Chabad Lubavitch. Trans Yosef Cohen. New York. Kehot Publication Society. (2002).

351

This was originally published in Hebrew under the title ‘Yemei Chabad’, this translation is a superb historical resource, for anyone interested in Habad history. It documents the important historical and religious days and events that have, and continue to, shape the day-to-day religious life of the movement.

Kahn. Rafael Nachman. Extraordinary Chassidic Tales. Trans. Basher Majerczyk. New York: Otsar Sifrei Lubavitch (1999).

This fascinating series contains a wide variety of different stories and mixes of folktale, law, myth and magic. There often does not seem to be any apparent moral to many of the stories, and may have originally been published to scare and puzzle children.

Kahn, Rabbi Yoel, Sefer Ha'arachim. (Hebrew) New York: Kehot Publication Society. (1989).

This is an extremely thorough insightful and incomplete encyclopaedia of Hasidic ideas. In Rabbi Yoel’s own broad unique, definitive and enigmatic style, it is an immensely dense and perceptive series of books touching some of the most important ideas in contemporary Lubavitch Hasidic thought.

Kranzler, Gershon. Rabbi Shneur Zalman of Ladi (sic), a brief presentation of the life, the work and the basic teachings of the Founder of Chabad Chasidism. New York: Kehot Publication Society. (1974).

The author reconstructs the little known history of the life and times of Rabbi Schneur Zalman of Liadi, based mainly on the talks and teachings of the Rebbe, and not historical events.

Metzger, Alter B. The Heroic Struggle. New York: Kehot Publication Society. (1999).

This is a very detailed and interesting account of the Previous Rebbe’s counter-revoltionary activity whilst in Stalinist Russia, much of which is sourced from his own diaries. It describes in detail the events leading up to his arrest, his torture at the hands of the Stalinist authorities and his liberation. It includes previously withheld information about his interrogation.

Mindel, Nissan. The Philosophy of Habad. New York: Kehot Publication Society. (1973).

This classic of Chabad literature it is an explanation of basic doctrines found in Rabbi Shneur Zalman’s Tanya, and therefore provides an interesting comparison with the Hasidic philosophy of the Rebbe.

352Rader, Benzion. To Touch the Divine – A Jewish Mysticism Primer – Papers delivered at the International Symposium on Jewish Mysticism, held in London in 1981. New York: Merkos L’inyonei Chinuch. (1989).

This is a collection of lectures by Zalman I. Posner, Immanuel Schochet, Yitzchak Block, Adin Steinsaltz, and Jonathan Sacks. They all espouse an interesting although apologetic Lubavitch party line, which I find intellectually questionable.

Schneersohn, Rabbi Joseph I. The Tzemach Tzedek and the Haskala Movement. Trans Zalman I. Posner, New York: Kehot Publication Society. (1969).

This is a detailed and factual description, a fascinating and historical account of the problems that the third Lubavitcher Rebbe had with the Haskalah movement, and the Russian government.

Schneersohn, Rabbi Joseph I. On Learning Chassidus (Kuntres Limud HaChassidus) Trans Zalman I. Posner, New York: Kehot Publication Society. (1959).

This is an excellent description of the Hasidic approach to learning and the principles involved in the process of learning anything, but particularly Hasidic philosophy.

Schneersohn, Rabbi Joseph I. Some Aspects of Chabad Chasidism. Trans Nissan Mendel, New York: Machve Israel. (1974).

A good introduction to major terms and ideologies of traditional Habad Hasidism.

Schneerson, Joseph Isaac. (1880-1950) Sefer Ha-Kuntreisim, Volumes 1-2. New York: Kehot Publishing Society. (1987).

These are some of the Previous Rebbe’s discoursers covering a variety of different issues and subjects traditionally discussed in Chabad Hasidic thought.

Schneersohn, Rabbi Joseph I. Lubavitcher Rabbi’s Memoirs. New York: Kehot Publication Society. (1993). Volumes 1-2.

A beautifully written literary piece, describing the birth and growth of the Chabad hasidic movement.

Schneersohn, Rabbi Menchem Mendel (1789-1886). Sefer Ha Likutim - Da"ch Tzemach Tzedek, (Hebrew) New York: Kehot Publication Society. (1984).

This is an extensive encyclopaedia of traditional Chabad Hasidic philosophy. It is a great resource on almost any idea dealt with in the study of traditional Chabad

353philosophy. It is, however, at times rather complicated and contains many obscure abbreviations that may not help those unfamiliar with its style.

Schneerson, Rabbi Menachem Mendel (1789-1866). Derech Mitzvosecho. (Hebrew) New York: Kehot Publishing Society. (1993).

This is a fascinating classic. It was written when the author was only thirteen years old. Derech Mitzmosecho provides a variety of heady, complex and highly technical Hasidic solutions to several important issues regarding Judaism. and the mystical reasons for mitzvos. For a while it was banned, or at least learning it was prohibited. This was because it quite radically provides interesting and compelling Hasidic reasons for the commandments, for which traditionally there are no real reasons, since they are seen as simply God’s will.

Schneerson Shalom DovBer, (1860-1920) To Know G-d, Maamar VeYadaata. New York: Kehot Publishing Society. (1993).

This is a classic of the Chabad school. In this work the Rebbe Rashab is bold and yet refined. He explores the conceptual problems of the relationship between the multiple and singular aspects of God’s existence. He does this by reflecting on the two names Elokim and YHVH. He promotes an experience of ultimate union and unity within multiplicity. These ideas are based on the traditional Kabbalistic fascination with the combining of the divine Hebrew names of God. However, the Rebbe Rashab takes this a step further and interprets these themes on a cosmic, existential and psychological level.

Schneersohn, Rabbi Shmuel (of Lubavitch) Mi Chamocha 5629 True Existence. Trans Yosef Marcus. New York Kehot Publication Society. (2002).

This is a bilingual translation of one of the Rebbe Marharash’s (the third Rebbe of Lubavitch’s) most famous discourses, with an extensive commentary. In it he explains the absolute and total existence of God, which precludes any other existence. It is a classic mystical approach to monotheism, which may be better understood as Monism.

Schochet, Jacob Immanuel. The Mystical Dimension Volumes, 1–3. New York: Kehot Publications. (1995).

This often quoted bastion of Chabad mysticism desperately attempts to sound worldly and well educated. Unfortunately it is a rather shallow and superficial.

354Schocet, Jacob Immanuel. Mystical Concepts in Chasidism: An Introduction to Kabbalistic Concepts and Doctrines. New York: Kehot Publication Society. (1988).

This is also often published along with English renderings of the Tanya, It describes and is a good and basic introduction to major terms and ideologies of traditional Chabad Hasidism.

Schocet, Jacob Immanuel. Tzava’at Harivash, The Testament of Rabbi Israel Baal Shem Tov. New York: Kehot Publication Society. (1998).

A fascinating book, detailing what is said to have been the devotional and moral teachings of the Baal Shem Tov, as understood by the Magid of Mezhirech. This is, as far as I am aware, the first time this early Hasidic text has been translated in full into English.

Schneersohn, Rabbi Shalom DovBer. On Ahavas Yisrael – Heichaltzu. New York: Kehot Publication Society. (1996).

This has to be the Rebbe Rashab’s major classic. Heichaltzu is a clever and profound Hasidic exegesis of the Numbers 31:1-4. In it he explains the fundamental difference between the Holy and Evil; the root and source of all Holiness is Oneness and Unity, and the source of all Evil is absolute division and separateness. His approach to the nature of self and ego is somewhat different from that of the Rebbe.

Touger, Eliyahu. Led by G-d’s Hand - the Baal Shem Tov’s conception of Hashgachah Peratis. New York: Sichos in English. (1998).

Here Touger demonstrates that the main teaching of the Baal Shem was that of Divine Providence, but this conclusion has been significantly influenced by the Rebbe’s thoughts on the subject.

Touger, Eliyahu. What We Believe. New York: Sichos in English. (2000).

Touger struggles to explain the fundamental belief in God, but in doing so shows that Faitel Levin’s view of the Rebbe’s theology as expressed in Heaven on Earth may not be entirely kosher.

Kaplan, Aryeh. The Light Beyond: Adventures in Hassidic Thought. New York/Jerusalem: Moznaim Publishing Corporation. (1981).

355Kaplan collects a short anthology of Hasidic teachings and ideas from a variety of sources, and this makes for an interesting read. This has helped to put the Rebbe’s style into a context of other Hasidic Rebbes, who all seem to be idiosyncratic.

Zalman, Schneur. Likkuttei Amarim – Tanya. New York: Kehot Publication Society. (1989).

The Tanya is the bible of Chabad Hasidic philosophy. It was written by the founder of the movement, Rabbi Schneur Zalman of Liadi. It is a vast and complicated work which contains basic principles on which much of the subsequent Lubavitch Rebbes based their own ideas. It is essential reading for anyone interested in early Chabad Hasidism and introduces the novice to primary concepts found throughout the schools philosophy.

The following books are those that deal with the subject of Moshiach, but fall outside the Lubavitch movement.

Rapoport, Chaim. The Messiah Problem – Berger, the angel and the scandal of reckless indiscrimination. Ilford: Anonymous publisher. (2002).

Chayoun, Yehudah. When Moshiach Comes – Halachic and Aggadic Perspectives. New York: Targum & Feldheim Press. (1994). The Chofetz Chaim. On Awaiting Moshiach. Trans Moshe Miller. Michigan: Targum Press (1993). Kaplan, Aryeh. The Real Messiah? A Jewish Response to Missionaries. New York: NCSY. (1976). Kramer, Chaim. Mashiach, Who? What? Why? How? Where? And When? Jerusalem/ New York: Breslov Research Institute. (1994). Tauber, Rabbi Ezriel. The Days are Coming – Rising to the Challenge of History’s most Crucial Time. Trans Yaakov Aster, New York: Sallheves & Feldheim. (1991). Sanowicz, Chaim. Torah View on Moshiach and Redemption. Los Angeles: Anonymous publishing (1993).

Secondary sources

Other comparative sources that discuss the Chabad-Lubavitch Movement, Hasidism, Messianism and/or Jewish Mysticism in general. Aescoly, Aaron. ‘Hahasidut bePolin’ in Halpern, I. (ed) Beit yisrael bePolin. (1953). Reprinted with an introduction by D. Assaf, Jerusalem: Magnes Press, (1998).

356Aschheim, Steven E. Brothers and Strangers. Madison, Wisconsin: University of Wisconsin Press, (1982). Assaf, David. Derekh haMalkhut: Rabbi Israel meRuzhin. Jerusalem: Merkaz Shazar, (1997). Assaf, David “Money for Household Expenses”. Economic Aspects of the Hasidic Court’, in Teller, A. (ed.) Scripta Hierosolymitana 38 (1998). Assaf, David (ed.) Zaddik ve’edah: hebetim historiyim vehevratiyim beheker hahasidut. Jerusalem: Merkaz Shazar, (2001). Band, Arnold (trans) Nahman of Bratslav — The Tales. New York: Paulist Press, (1978). Bartal, Israel. ‘Mibavu’ah me’uvetet le’uvdah historit: sifrut hahaskalah umehkar hatenu’ah hahasidit’, Mada’ei hayahadut 32 (1992). Bartal, Israel ‘The Imprint of Haskalah Literature on the Historiography of Hasidism’, in Rapoport-Albert, A. (ed.) Hasidism Reappraised (1996) (English Translation of Bartal 1992).

Ben-Amos, Dan and Mintz, Jerome R. (trans and eds) In Praise of the Baal Shem Tov. Bloomington / London: Indiana University Press, (1970). Berger, David. The Rebbe, The Messiah, and the Scandal of Orthodox Indifference. London: The Littman Library of Jewish Civilization, (2001). Biale, David Eros and the Jews. New York: Basic Books, (1992). Biale, David ‘The Lust for Asceticism in the Hasidic Movement’, in Magonet, J. (ed.) Jewish Explorations of Sexuality. Providence: Berghahn Books, (1995) Brayer, M. M. The Jewish Woman in Rabbinic Literature. Vol. 2: A Psychohistorical Perspective. Hoboken, New Jewrsey: Ktav Publishing House, (1986). Buber, Martin. Hasidism and Modern Man. Trans. Maurice Friedman. New York: Harper and Row, Publishers, Inc. (1966).

Buber, Martin. Tales of the Hasidim- The Early Masters. Trans. Olga Marx.New York: Marstin Press. (1947).

Buber, Martin. For the Sake of Heaven. Trans Ludwig Lewishon. New York: Meridian Books (1958).

Buber, Martin. Tales of the Hasidim. New York: Schocken Books. (1972) 2 volumes.

Buber. Martin. Tales of Rabbi Nachman. Trans Maurice Friedman. New York: Horizon Press. (1974).

Buber. Martin. The Legend of the Baal Shem. Trans Maurice Friedman. New Jersy: University Press Princton. (1969).

357Buber. Martin. The Origin and Meaning of Hasidism. Trans Maurice Friedman. New York: Harper (1966). Buber. Martin. ‘Spinoza, Sabbatai Zvi and the Baal Shem’ in, The Origin and Meaning of Hasidism. Trans Maurice Friedman. New York: Harper (1966). Buber, Martin ‘My Way to Hasidism’, in Hundert, G.D. (ed) Essential Papers on Hasidism. (1991). Dan, Joseph Hasipur hahasidi. Jerusalem: Keter Publishing House, (1975). Dan, Joseph The Teachings of Hasidism. New York: Behrman House, (1983).

Dan, Joseph. The Heart and the Foundation. Oxford/ NewYork: Oxford University Press, (2002).

Davies, Norman God’s Playgound: A History of Poland. Oxford: Clarendon Press. (1981), 2 volumes. Deutsch, Nathaniel The Maiden of Ludmir. A Jewish Holy Woman and Her World. Berkeley: University of California Press, (2003). Deutsch, Nathaniel ‘New Archival Sources on the Maiden of Ludmir’. Jewish Social Studies 9 (2002). Dinur, Benzion Bemifneh hadorot. Jerusalem: Mosad Bialik, (1955). Dinur, Benzion ‘The Messianic-Prophetic Role of the Baal Shem Tov’, in Saperstein, M. (ed.) Essential Papers on Messianic Movements and Personalities in Jewish History (1992). Dinur, Benzion ‘The Origins of Hasidism and Its Social and Messianic Foundations’ in Hundert G.D. (ed) Essential Papers on Hasidism (1991). Dresner, Samuel ‘Hasidism and its Opponents’, in Jospe, R. and Wagner, S. (eds.) Great Schisms in Jewish History. New York: Ktav, (1981). Dresner, Samuel H. Levi Yitzhak of Berditchev. New York-Bridgeport: Hartmore House, (1974). Dresner, Samuel H. The Zaddik. London — New York — Toronto: Abelard-Schuman, (1960).

Dubnow, Simon History of the Jews in Russia and Poland. 3 volumes, Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society, 1916-1920; reprint New York: Ktav Publishing House, (1975). Dubnow, Simon ‘The Beginnings: The Baal Shem Tov (Besht) and the Center in Podolia’, in Hundert, G.D. (ed) Essential Papers on Hasidism (1991). Dubnow, Simon ‘The Maggid of Miedzyrzecz, His Associates, and the Center in Volhynia (1760-1772)’ in Hundert, G.D. (ed) Essential Papers on Hasidism (1991).

358

Dubnow, Simon Toledot hahasidut. Tel Aviv: Dvir, (1960). Dvir-Goldberg, Rivka The Zaddik and the Palace of Leviathan. A Study of Hasidic Tales Told by the Zaddikim. Tel Aviv: Hakibbutz Hameuchad, (2003) (in Hebrew). Eichenstein, Zevi Hirsch Turn Aside from Evil and Do Good. English Translation by Louis Jacobs. London: The Littman Library of Jewish Civilization, (1995). Elior, Rachel ‘Habad: The Contemplative Ascent to God’, in Green, A. (ed) Jewish Spirituality. Vol 2 (1987). Elior, Rachel The Theory of Divinity of Hasidut Habad: Second Generation. Jerusalem: Magnes Press. (1982) [Hebrew].

Elior, Rachel The Paradoxical Ascent To God: The Kabbalistic Theosophy of Habad Hasidism. New York: State University of New York Press, (1993).

Elior, Rachel ‘Hazikah shebein kabbalah lahasidut’ in Divrei hakongres ha’olami hateshi’i lemada’ei hayahadut, hativah gimel. Jerusalem: World Union of Jewish Studies, (1986). Elior, Rachel ‘Yesh ve’ayin — defusei yesod bamahashavah hahasidit’ in Goldreich, A. and Oron, M. (eds) Masu’ot: mehkarim besifrut hakabalah uvemahshevet yisrael mugashim lezikhro shel prof. Ephraim Gottlieb. Jerusalem: Mosad Bialik, (1994). Elior, Rachel ‘Between Yesh and Ayin : The Doctrine of the Zaddik in the Works of Jacob Isaac, the Seer of Lublin’ in Rapoport-Albert, A. and Zipperstein, S. J. (eds) Jewish History: Essays in Honour of Chimen Abramsky. London: Peter Halban, (1988). Elior, Rachel ‘The Paradigms of Yesh and ‘Ayin in Hasidic Thought’, in Rapoport-Albert, A. (ed.) Hasidism Reappraised (1996). Elior, Rachel ‘The Lubavitch Messianic Resurgence: The Historical and Mystical Background 1939-1996’, in Shafer, P. and Cohen, M. (eds.) Toward the Millenium: Messianic Expectations from Bible to Waco. Leiden: Brill, (1998). Elior, Rachel, Bartal, Israel, and Shmeruk, Chone (eds.), Zaddikim ve’anshey ma’aseh. Mehkarim behasidut Polin. Jerusalem: Mosad Bialik, (1994). El-Or, Tamar Educated and Ignorant: Ultraorthodox Women and their World. Boulder: Lynne Rienner Publishers, (1994). Etkes, Immanuel ‘Aliyato shel R. Shneor Zalman milady le’emdat manhigut’, Tarbiz 54 (1986). Etkes, Immanuel Ba’al hashem. Jerusalem: Merkaz Shazar, (2000).

359Etkes, Immanuel ‘Darko shel R. Shneor Zalman miladi kemanhig shel hasidim’, Zion 50 (1985). Etkes, Immanuel ‘Hagra vereshit hahitnagedut lahasidut’ in Temurot bahistoriah hayehudit hahadashah: kovets ma’amarim shai liShmuel Ettinger. Jerusalem: Merkaz Shazar, (1987). Etkes, Immanuel ‘Hasidism As A Movement’ in Safran, B. (ed) Hasidism: Continuity or Innovation (1988). Etkes, Immanuel ‘Heker hahasidut: megamot vekivunim’. Mada’ei hayahadut 31 (1991). Etkes, Immanuel ‘Mekomam shel hamagiyah uva’alei hashem bahevrah ha’ashkenazit bemifneh hame’ot hayod-zayin — hayod het’, Zion 60 (1995). Etkes, Immanuel Polin: perakim betoledot yehudei mizrah eiropah, yehidah 9-10. Tel Aviv: Ha’universitah Hapetuhah, (1991a). Etkes, Immanuel Tenu’at hahasidut bereshitah. (Israel Ministry of Defence, 1998). Etkes, Immanuel ‘The Historical Besht – Reconstruction or Destruction’, Polin 12 London: The Littman Library of Jewish Civilization, (1999). Etkes, Immanuel ‘The Study of Hasidism: Past Trends and New Directions’, in Rapoport-Albert, A. (ed.) Hasidism Reappraised (1996) (English translation of Etkes 1991). Etkes, Immanuel ‘The Zaddik: The Interrelationship between Religious Doctrine and Social Organisation’, in Rapoport-Albert, A. (ed.) Hasidism Reappraised (1996). Etkes, Immanuel Yahid bedoro: haGa’on miVilna – demut vedimmuy. Jerusalem: Merkaz Shazar, (1998). Etkes, Immanuel, Assaf, David, and Dan, Joseph (eds.) Mehkerey hasidut (Jerusalem Studies in Jewish Thought 15) Jerusalem: Hebrew University, (1999). Ettinger, Shmuel ‘The Hasidic movement — Reality and Ideals’, in Hundert, G.D. (ed) Essential Papers on Hasidism (1991). Ettinger, Shmuel ‘Hasidism and the Kahal in Eastern Europe’, in Rapoport-Albert, A. (ed.) Hasidism Reappraised (1996) English version of Ettinger (1994). Ettinger, Shmuel ‘Hahasidut vehakahal bemizrah eiropah’, in id. Bein Polin leRusiah. Jerusalem: Merkaz Shazar — Mosad Bialik, (1994). Faierstein, Morris M. All is in the Hands of Heaven: The Teachings of Rabbi Mordecai Joseph Leiner of Izbica. Hoboken, New Jersey: Ktav Publishing House, (1989).

360Fishman, David E. Russia’s First Modern Jews: The Jews of Shklov. New York: New York University Press, (1995). Foxbrunner, Roman A. Habad, The Hasidism of R. Shneur Zalman of Lyady. Tuscaloosa and London: University of Alabama Press, (1992). Frankel, Jonathan. ‘S.M. Dubnov — Historian and Ideologist’, in Dubnov-Erlich, S. The Life And Work of S. M. Dubnov. Bloomington and Indianapolis: Indiana University Press, (1991). Friedman, Menahem ‘Habad as Messianic Fundamentalism: From Local Particularism to Universal Jewish Mission’, in Marty, M. E. and Appelby, S. (eds.) Accounting for Fundamentalism: The Dynamic Character of Movements. Chicago: Chicago University Press, (1994).

Goldberg, Hillel, Between Berlin and Slobodka: Jewish Transition Figures from Eastern Europe. New York: KTAV. (1989). Graetz, Heinrich History of the Jews. 5 volumes. London: Jewish Chronicle, (1901). Green, Arthur (ed) Jewish Spirituality. 2 volumes New York: Crossroad, (1986-87): Volume 2 From the Seventeenth Century Revival to the Present. Green, Arthur Tormented Master: A Life of Rabbi Nahman of Bratslav. Alabama: University of Alabama Press, (1979). Green, Arthur ‘Typologies of Leadership and the Hasidic Zaddiq’ in id. (ed) Jewish Spirituality vol. 2 (1987). Green, Arthur ‘Zaddik as Axis Mundi in Later Judaism’, Journal of the American Academy of Religion 45 (1977).

Greenberg, Gershon ‘Redemption After Holocaust According to Mahane Israel-Lubavitch 1940-1945’, Modern Judaism 12 (1992).

Greenberg, Gershon. "Consoling truth: Eliezer Schweid's Ben hurban le'yeshua: a review essay" Modern Judaism - Volume 17, Number 3, October 1997, pp. 297-311

Gershon Greenberg, "The Sect of Catastrophe: Mahane Israel-Lubavitch, 1940-1945" Studies in Jewish Civilization Volume 3: Jewish Sects, Religious Movements, and Political Parties. Gries, Zeev Sefer sofer vesipur bereshit hahasidut. Israel: Hakibbutz Hameuchad, (1992). Gries, Zeev Sifrut hahanhagot. (Jerusalem: Mosad Bialik, 1989). Gries, Zeev ‘The Hasidic Managing Editor as an Agent of Culture’, in Rapoport-Albert, A. (ed.) Hasidism Reappraised (1996).

361Grozinger, Karl Erich ‘The Source Value of the Basic Recentions of Shivhei haBesht’, in Rapoport-Albert, A. (ed.) Hasidism Reappraised (1996). Grunfeld, Frederic V. Prophets Without Honour – a background to Freud, Kafka, Einstein and their world. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston (1979).

Halperin, David J. Abraham Miguel Cardozo –selected writings. New York: Paulist Press. (2001)

Halpern, Israel (ed) Beit yisrael bePolin. 2 Volumes Jerusalem: Hamahlakah le’inyenei hano’ar, (1948-1953). Volume 2. Halpern, Israel Yehudim veyahadut bemizrah Eiropah. Jerusalem: Magnes Press, (1968). Hasdai, Yaacov ‘The origins of the Conflict Between Hasidim and Mitnagdim’ in Safran, B. (ed) Hasidism — Continuity or Innovation. (1988). Henry, S. and Taitz, E. Written Out of History. Freshmeadows: Biblio Press, (1983). Heschel, Abraham J. The Circle Of the Baal Shem Tov: Studies in Hasidism. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press, (1985). Horodezky, Shmuel Abba Hahasidut vehahasidim. 4 vols. (Berlin, 1922-3, Tel Aviv: Dvir, 1927-43). Horodezky, Shmuel Abba Leaders of Hasidism. London: “Hasefer” Agency in Literature, (1928). Hundert, Gershon D. (ed) Essential Papers On Hasidism. New York and London: New York University Press, (1991).

Hundert, Gershon D. ‘Jews in Polish Private Towns — The Jewish Community in Opatow and the Town’s Owners in the Eighteenth Century’, in Mendelsohn, E. and Shmeruk, C. (eds) Kovets mehkarim al yehudei Polin: sefer lezikhro shel Paul Glikson. Jerusalem: Hamerkaz leheker toledot yehudei Polin, (1987). Hundert, Gershon D. ‘The Conditions in Jewish Society in the Polish Lithuanian Commonwealth in the Middle Decades of the Eighteenth Century’, in Rapoport-Albert, A. (ed.) Hasidism Reappraised (1996). Hundert, Gershon D. Jewish Poland-Lithuania.in the Eighteenth Century. A Genealogy of Modernity. Berkeley: University of California Press, (2004). Hundert, Gershon D. The Jews in a Polish Private Town: The Case of Opatow in the Eighteenth Century. Baltimore and London: John Hopkins University Press, (1992).

Idel, Moshe. Hasidism, Between Ecstasy and Magic. New York: State University of New York Press, Albany. (1995).

362Idel, Moshe. Messianic Mystics. New Haven and London: Yale University Press. (1998).

Idel, Moshe. Kabbalah New Perspectives. New Haven and London: Yale University Press. (1988).

Idel, Moshe ‘One from a Town, Two from a Clan — The Question of the Diffusion of Lurianic Kabbalah and Sabbateanism: A Re-examination’, Jewish History 7 (1993). Idel, Moshe ‘Perceptions of Kabbalah in the second half of the 18th century’, Jewish Thought and Philosophy 1 (1991).

Jacobs, Louis Hasidic Prayer. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, (1972). Pbk edition with new Introduction. London: The Littman Library of Jewish Civilization, (1993). Jacobs, Louis Hasidic Thought. New York: Behrman House, (1976). Jacobs, Louis Jewish Mystical Testimonies. New York: Schocken Books, (1978). Jacobs, Louis Seeker of Unity: The Life and Works of Aaron of Starosselje. London: Valentine, Mitchell, (1966). Jacobs, Louis ‘The Uplifting of Sparks in Later Jewish Mysticism’ in Green, A. (ed) Jewish Spirituality. Volume 2 (1987). Jacobs, Louis ‘Tobacco and the Hasidim’, Polin 11, Littman Library of Jewish Civilization, (1998).

Kallus, Menachem ‘The Relationship of the Baal Shem Tov to the Practice of Lurianic Kavvanot in Light of his Comments on Siddur Rashkov’. Kabbalah: Journal for the Study of Jewish Mystical Texts 2. Los Angeles: Cherub Press, (1997). Kaplan, Aryeh. Meditation and Kabbalah. Maine: Samuel Weiser, Inc. (1985).

Karlinsky, Nahum Historiyah shekeneged. Igrot hahasidim me’erets yisrael: hatext vehakontext. Jerusalem: Yad Izhak Ben-Zvi, (1998). Katz, Jacob Tradition and Crisis. New York: New York University Press, (1993). Klausner, J. The Messianic Idea in Israel, Translated by W.F. Stinespring, Macmillan & Co., NY, (1966). Kranzler, George Hasidic Williamsburg: A Contemporary American Hasidic Community. Northvale, New Jersey: Jason Aronson, (1995). Krassen, Miles Uniter of Heaven and Earth: Rabbi Meshullam Feibush Heller of Zbarazh and the Rise of Hasidism in Eastern Galicia. Albany: State University of New York Press, (1998).

363 Landau, David. Piety and Power: The world of Jewish Fundamentalism. London: Martin and Warburg Ltd, (1993).

Langer, Jiri. Nine Gates to the Chassidic Mysteries. Trans Stephen Jolly. New York: Behrman House Inc, (1976).

Lamm, Norman. The Religious Thought of Hasidism, text and commentary. New Jersey: The Michael Scharf Publication Trust of Yeshiva University Press. (1999)

Lenowitz, Harris The Jewish Messiahs From Galilee to Crown Heights. New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press, (1998).

Liebes, Yehuda. Studies in the Zohar. Trans Arnold Schwarts. New York: New York State University Press, (1993).

Liebes, Yehuda ‘Ha-Tikun Ha-Kelali of R. Nahman of Bratslav and its Sabbatean Links’, Liebes, Y. Studies in Jewish Myth and Jewish Messianism. Albany: State University of New York Press, (1993). Loewenthal, Naftali Communicating the Infinite: The Emergence of the Habad School. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press, (1990). Loewenthal, Naftali ‘”Daughter/Wife of a Hasid” or “Hasidic Woman”?’.Jewish Studies – Journal of the World Union of Jewish Studies 40 (2000), English Section. Loewenthal, Naftali ‘The Neutralisation of Messianism and the Apocalypse’, in Elior, R. (ed.) Kolot rabbim: sefer hazikkaron leRivkah Shatz-Uffenheimer (Jerusalem Studies in Jewish Thought 13). 2 vols. Vol. 2, English Section. Jerusalem: The Hebrew University, (1996). Loewenthal, Naftali ‘“Reason” and “Beyond Reason” in Habad Hasidism’ in Hallamish, M. (ed.) Alei Shefer: mehkarim besifrut hehagut hayehudit mugashim likhvod harav Dr. Alexander Safran. Ramat Gan: Bar Ilan University, (1990). Loewenthal, Naftali ‘Women and the Dialectic of Spirituality in Hasidism’, in Etkes, I., Assaf, D., Bartal, I., and Reiner, E. (eds.) Bema’ageley hasidim. Kovets mehkarim lezikhro shel Mordechai Wilensky. English Section. Jerusalem: Mosad Bialik, (1999).

Magid, Shaul (ed.) God’s Voice from the Void:Old and New Studies in Bratslav Hasidism New York: New York University Press, (2002). Magid, Shaul Hasidism on the Margin: Reconciliation, Antinomianism, and Messianism in Izbica and Radzin Hasidism. University of Wisconsin Press, (2003). Mahler, Raphael Hasidism and the Jewish Enlightenment. Philadelphia: The Jewish Publication Society of America, (1985).

364Mahler, Raphael ‘Hasidism and the Jewish Enlightenment’ in Hundert, G.D. (ed) Essential papers on Hasidism (1991). Maimon, Solomon The Autobiography of Solomon Maimon. (London: The East and West Library, 1954). Appendix ii alone is the essential reading recommended here, and it is reprinted in Hundert, G.D. (ed). Essential Papers on Hasidism (1991). Mark, Zvi Mysticism and Madness in the Work of Nahman of Bratslav. Tel Aviv: Am Oved, (2003). Marcus, Joel, ‘Modern and Ancient Jewish Apocalypticism,’ Journal of Religion 76 (1996) 1-27.

Marcus, Joel, ‘The once and future Messiah in early Christianity and Chabad,’ In manuscript: Currently unpublished. (2000).

Meijers, Daniel Ascetic Hasidism in Jerusalem. The Guardian-of-The-Faithful Community of Mea Shearim. Leiden: Brill, (1992). Minkin, Jacob S. The Romance of Hasidism. No. Holywood, California: Wilshire Book Company, (1971).

Mintz, Jerome R. Legends of the Hasidim: An Introduction to the Hasidic Culture and Oral Tradition in the New World. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press, (1968).

Mintz, Jerome R. Hasidic People, A Place in the New world, London: Harvard University Press, (1992).

Nadler, Allan The Faith of the Mithnagdim: Responses to Hasidic Rupture. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, (1997). Newman, Louis I. Hasidic Anthology. New York: Schocken Books, (1963). Nigal, Gedalyah Manhig ve’edah. Israel, (1962). Nigal, Gedalyah (ed. with Introduction). No’am Elimelech. (of Elimelech of Lizensk). 2 volumes, Jerusalem: Mosad HaRav Kook, (1978). Nigal, Gedalyah Torot ba’al hatoledot. Jerusalem: Mosad HaRav Kook, (1974). Nigal, Gedalyah Hasiporet hahasidit, toledoteihah venose’eihah. Jerusalem: Marcus, (1981). Pedaya, Haviva ‘lehitpathuto shel hadagam hahevrati-dati-kalkali bahasidut. Hapidyon, hahavurah veha’aliyah laregel’, in Ben Sasson, M. (ed.) Dat vekalkalah. Jerusalem: Merkaz Shazar, (1995).

365Perl, Joseph Al mahut kat hahasidim (Uber das Wesen der Sekte der Chassidim). (Ed) Rubinstein, A. Jerusalem: Israel Academy, (1977). Perl, Joseph Ma’asiyot veigarot. (Ed) Shmeruk, C. and Werses, S. Jerusalem: Israel Academy, (1969). Perl, Joseph Revealer of Secrets. Translated with an introduction and notes by Dov Taylor. Boulder, Colorado: Westview Press, (1997). Piekarz, Mendel Bein ideologiah limetsi’ut. Jerusalem: Mosad Bialik, (1994). Piekarz, Mendel Biyemei tsemihat hahasidut. Jerusalem: Mosad Bialik, (1978). Piekarz, Mendel Hahanhagah hahasidit. Jerusalem: Mosad Bialik, (1999). Piekarz, Mendel ‘Hasidism as a Socio-religious Movement on the Evidence of Devekut’, in Rapoport-Albert, A. (ed.) Hasidism Reappraised (1996). Piekarz, Mendel Hasidut Braslav. Jerusalem: Mosad Bialik, (1972). Piekarz, Mendel Hasidut Polin bein shetei hamilhamot uvigezerot tav”shin – tav shin”he. Jerusalem: Mosad Bialik, (1990). Pitchon, Eduardo ‘Hasidic Attitudes towards Sexuality’, in Magonet, J. (ed.) Jewish Explorations of Sexuality. Providence: Berghahn Books, (1995). Polen, Nehemia ‘Miriam’s Dance: Radical Egalitarianism in Hasidic Thought’, Modern Judaism 12 (1992).

Rabinowics, Harry. A World Apart: The Story of the Chassidim in Britain. London: Vallentine Mitchell and Co. Ltd, (1997).

Rabinowicz, Harry A Guide to Hasidism. New York and London: Thomas Yosselof, (1960). Rabinowicz, Harry S. Hasidism, The Movement and its Masters. Northvale, New Jersey: Jason Aronson, (1988). Rabinowitsch, Wolf Zeev. Lithuanian Hasidism. London: Valentine, Mitchell, (1970).

Rapoport-Albert, Ada ‘God and the Zaddik as the Two Focal Points of Hasidic Worship’ in Hundert, G.D. (ed.) Essential Papers on Hasidism. (1991). Rapoport-Albert, Ada, ‘Hagiography with Footnotes: Edifying Tales and the Writing of History in Hasidism’, in Rapoport-Albert, A. (ed.) Essays in Jewish Historiography. History and Theory Beiheft 27. Wesleyan University: 1988, reprinted Atlanta, Georgia: Scholars Press, (1991). Rapoport-Albert, Ada (ed.) Hasidism Reappraised. London: The Littman Library of Jewish Civilization, (1996).

366Rapoport-Albert, Ada ‘Hasidism After 1772: Structural Continuity and Change’, in Rapoport-Albert, A. (ed.) Hasidism Reappraised (1996) (English version of Rapoport-Albert 1990). Rapoport-Albert, Ada ‘Hatenu’ah hahasidit aharei shenat 1772: retsef mivni ‘o temurah’, Zion 55 (1990). Rapoport-Albert, Ada ‘On women in Hasidism, S. A. Horodecky and the Maid of Ludmir Tradition’ in Rapoport-Albert, A. and Zipperstein, S. J. (eds) Jewish History — Essays in Honour of Chimen Abramsky. London: Peter Halban, (1988) (Revised and expanded Hebrew version of this in Assaf, D. (ed.), Zaddik ve’edah (2001).

Ravitzky Aviezer. ‘The Revealed End and the Jewish State’. Messianism, Zionism, and Jewish Religious Radicalism. Tel Aviv: Om Oved, (1993).

Ravitzky, Aviezer, Messianism, Zionism, and Jewish Religious Radicalism. Translated by Michael Swirsky and Jonathan Chipman. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. (CSHJ) Chicago Studies in the History of Judaism. (1996).

Rosman, Moshe (Murrey J.), Founder of Hasidism. A Quest for the Historical Ba’al Shem Tov. Berkeley: University of California Press, (1996). Rosman, Moshe (Murray J.), ‘In Praise of the Ba’al Shem Tov: A User’s Guide to the Editions of Shivhei haBesht’, Polin 10. London: Littman Library of Jewish Civilization, (1997). Rosman, Murray J. ‘Jewish Perceptions of Insecurity and Powerlessness in 16th-18th Century Poland’, Polin 1. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, (1986). Rosman, Murray J. The Lord’s Jews: Magnate-Jewish Relations in the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth during the 18th Century. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, (1990). Rosman, Murray J. ‘Miedzyboz and Rabbi Israel Baal Shem Tov’ in Hundert, G.D. (ed) Essential Papers on Hasidism (1991). Rubin, Israel Satmar: Two Generations of an Urban Island. Peter Lang: New York, (1997). Rubinstein, Areyeh. Hasidism. Jerusalem, Keter Books (1975).

Rubinstein, Avraham (ed) Perakim betorat hahasidut uvetoledoteihah. Jerusalem: Merkaz Zalman Shazar, (1977).

Rubinstein, Avraham ‘Bein hasidut leshabeta’ut’. In id. (ed) Perakim betorat hahasidut uvetoledoteitah (1977). Safran, Bezalel (ed) Hasidism: Continuity or Innovation? Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, (1988). Safrin, Yizhak Isaac of Komarno Book of Secrets, in Faierstein, Morris (trans. And ed.) Jewish Mystical Testimonies. New York: Paulist Press, (1999).

367 Saperstein, Marc (ed.) Essential Papers on Messianic Movements and Personalities in Jewish History. New York: New York University Press, (1992). Schatz-Uffenheimer, Rivka Hasidism As Mysticism. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, (1993). Schatz-Uffenheimer, Rivka ‘Lemahuto shel hatsadik bahasidut: iyunim betorat hatsadik shel R. Elimelech miLizensk’, Molad 18 nos. 144-5 (1960). Schatz-Uffenheimer, Rivka ‘Gershom Scholem’s Interpretation of Hasidism as an Expression of His Idealism’ in Mendes-Flohr, P. (ed) Gershom Scholem: The Man And His Work. New York: State University of New York Press, (1994). Schochet, E. J. The Hasidic Movement and the Gaon of Vilna. Northvale, New Jersey: Jason Aronson, (1994).

Scholem, Gershom. Sabbatai Sevi, the Mystical Messiah. Trans. R.J. Zwi Werblowsky. New Jersey: Princeton University Press. (1973).

Scholem, Gershom. The Messianic Idea in Judaism, and other essays on Jewish Spirituality. New York: Schocken Books, Inc. (1995).

Scholem, Gershom ‘Devekut, or Communion with God’ in id. The Messianic Idea in Judaism (1971). Reproduced in Hundert, G.D. (ed) Essential Papers on Hasidism. (1991) pp. 275-298.

Scholem, Gershom ‘Martin Buber’s Interpretation of Hasidism’ in id. The Messianic Idea in Judaism (1971). Scholem, Gershom ‘The Neutralisation of the Messianic Element in Early Hasidism’ in id. The Messianic Idea in Judaism (1971). Scholem, Gershom ‘Redemption through Sin’. in id. The Messianic Idea in Judaism (1971).

Scholem, Gershom. Major Trends in Jewish Mysticism. New York: Schocken Books, Inc. (1995).

Scholem, Gershom. On the Kabbalah and its Symbolism. Trans. Ralph Manheim. New York: Schcken Books. (1977).

Scholem, Gershom ‘Demuto hahistorit shel R. Yisrael Ba’al Shem Tov’ in id. Devarim bego. Tel Aviv: Am Oved, (1975). Scholem, Gershom ‘Hatenu’ah hashabeta’it bePolin’ in Halpern (ed) Beit yisrael bePolin (1953). Scholem, Gershom Kabbalah. Jerusalem: Keter Publishing House, (1974).

368Scholem, Gershom On the Mystical Shape of the Godhead. New York: Schocken Books, (1991). Scholem, Gershom ‘Tsaddik : The Righteous One’ in id. The Mystical Shape of the Godhead. (1991). Scholem, Gershom ‘Shetei ha’eduyot harishonot al havurot hahasidim vehaBesht’ in Rubinstein, A. (ed) Perakim betorat hahasidut vetoledoteihah (1977). Scholem, Gershom ‘Three Types of Jewish Piety’, Ariel 32 (1973).

Seltzer, Robert M. ‘The Secular Appropriation of Hasidism by an East European Jewish Intellectual: Dubnow, Renan, and the Besht’ in Polin 1. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, (1986). Shapiro, Malkah The Rebbe’s Daughter. Memoir of a Hasidic Childhood. Translated with an Introduction and Commentary by Nehemia Polen. Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society, (2002). Sharot, Stephen Messianism, Mysticism, and Magic. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, (1982).

Shmeruk, Chone ‘Hasidism and the Kehilla’ in Polonsky, A., Basista, Jakub and Link-Lenczowski, Andrzej (eds) The Jews in Old Poland 1000-1795. London- New York: I. B. Tauris, (1993). Shmeruk, Chone ‘Hasipurim’ al R. Adam Ba’al Shem vegilguleihem benushe’ot sefer “shivhei haBesth”’ in id. Sifrut Yiddish bePolin. Jerusalem: Magnes Press, (1981). Shmeruk, Chone ‘Hahasidut ve’iskei hahakhirut’, Zion 35 (1970).

Shmeruk, Chone ‘Mashma’utah hahevratit shel hashehitah hahasidit’, Zion 20 (1955). Shochat, Azriel ‘Lemahutah shel hasimhah bahasidut’, Zion 16 (1951). Stampfer, Shaul ‘Gender Differentiation and Education of Jewish Women in Nineteenth Century Eastern Europe’, Polin 7 (1992). Reprinted in Polonsky, A. (ed.) Studies from Polin. From Stetl to Socialism. London: The Littman Library of Jewish Civilization, (1993). Teller, Adam ‘Hape’ilut hakakalit shel hayehudim bePolin bamahatsit harishonah shel hame’ah ha-17 uvame’ah ha-18’, in Bartal, I. And Gutman, I. (eds.) Kiyyum vashever. Yehudei Polin ledoroteihem. Jerusalem: Merkaz Shazar, (1997). Teller, Adam (ed.) Scripta Hierosolymitana 38: Studies in the History of the Jews in Old Poland in Honor of Jacob Goldberg. Jerusalem: Magnes Press, (1998). Tishby, Isaiah ‘Bein shabeta’ut lahasidut: shabeta’uto shel hamekubal R. Ya’akov Kopl Lifshits miMezhirech’ in id. Netivei emunah uninut. Ramat Gan: Masadah, (1964).

369

Tishby, Isaiah ‘Hara’ayon hameshihi vehamegamot hameshihiyot bitsemihat hahasidut’, Zion 32 (1967). Tishby, Isaiah and Dan, Joseph ‘Torat hahasidut vesifrutah’ in Rubinstein, A. (ed) Perakim betorat hahasidut (1977). Weinman, Aryeh The Hasidic Parable. Philadelphia: The Jewish Publication Society, (2001). Weinryb, Bernard D. The Jews of Poland. Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society of America, (1973). Weiss, Joseph G. Mehkarim bahasidut Braslav. Jerusalem: Mosad Bialik, (1974). Weiss, Joseph G. ‘Reshit tsemihatah shel haderekh hahasidit’ in Rubinstein, A. (ed.) Perakim betorat hahasidut uvetoledoteihah (1977). Weiss, Joseph G. Studies in Eastern European Jewish Mysticism. Oxford: Oxford University Press, (1985).

Werses, Shmuel Megamot vetsurot besifrut hahaskalah. Jerusalem: Magnes Press, (1990). Wertheim, Aaron Laws and Customs in Hasidism. Hoboken, New Jersey: Ktav Publishing House, (1992). Wertheim, Aaron ‘Traditions and Customs in Hasidism’ in Hundert, G.D. (ed) Essential Papers on Hasidism (1991). Wilensky, Mordecai L. ‘Hasidic-Mitnaggedic Polemics in the Jewish Communities of Eastern Europe: The Hostile Phase’ in Hundert, G.D. (ed) Essential Papers on Hasidism (1991). Wilensky, Mordecai L. Hasidim umitnaggedim. 2 volumes Jerusalem: Mosad Bialik, (1970).

Winkler,Gershon They Called Her Rebbe. New York: Judaica Press, (1991). Winkler, Gershon. The Place where you are standing is Holy, A Jewish Theology on Human Relationships. New Jersey: Jason Aronson Inc, (1994).