On gimmel tammuz the mind begins to run. Emotions fly too high to be grasped. What the day means is too muddled down in politics . . . From the dark days of Chof Beis Shevat and on, the real Lubavitch is presented in distorted snap shots - everything is seen through the lens of the agendas of those that lived then. And as to us? The Lubavitch that grew to adulthood after the stroke, after the histalkus . . .
In shlichus the Rebbe attained eternal life. He split himself into a thousand pieces, and scattered them throughout the world. And now, the seeds blown to the win have tenaciously found fertile soil and taken root.
2 years ago
11 comments:
But they still must be tended or they can grow crooked; the job is still in our hands and we have more of an influence than we may like to have.
Oy, I miss him... =(
I think the Rebbe lives on by the thousands of Lubavitchers that study the Sichos and the (smaller number) that studies the mamorim. Also, even those that put energy into nigleh, should realize that the Rebbe's great emphasis on it, is a great source of inspiration and chizuk for them. Imagine all the tens of thousands of bletter studied in Chabad mosdos that all can somewhat be attributed to the Rebbe's exhertion. YZ"B
In a way, the Rebbe is still alive by his legacy bib'chinas "Yaakov avinu lo meis."
As an aside, can you explain to me why some lubavitchers treat the Rebbe's yohrtzeit as a chassidishe hilula --IOW with festivities -- while others mourn like tisha b'av. Both have obvious reasons, but what makes which choose what?
mbm: al ta'am v'rei'ach ein l'hisvakei'ach.
"In shlichus the Rebbe attained eternal life" - Nice try at rationalizing away the truth about the Rebbe.
The same can be said of Considering Chabad's attempt to blurbrush real eternity.
-Chezky: Well put.
-MBM: Tuli b'hergish.
-Considering: K'muvin, the Rebbe's Torah is his essence - ana nafshi kasuvis yehovis . . . Ich gei in himmel un di ksovim loz ich eich. There is no better hiskashrus to the Rebbe then limud toraso . . . and the Rebbe gave himself over entirely in his torah.
That being sais: while the rebbe's torah is unique - the idea of a tzadik remaining in this world through Torah is not.
But shlichus is something not found elsewhere. Shlucho shel adam kamoso - kamoso mamash (the 3 dargos of shlichus from the lekach tov - plus the 4 darga the rebbe was machadish).
-At the Edge: I have no clue what you're trying to say. As the Rashag once said: In Lubavitch is altz geven aufen! (and as R' Yossel Weinberg replied 'at dach dos mein ich' v'dal).
I was just recently in New York. I visited Nadvorna and saw the Nadvorna Rebbe, Satmar and saw the Satmar Rebbe, Chernovitz and saw the Chernovitzer Rebbe.
I wish I could visit 770, Lubavitch, and likewise see the Lubavitcher Rebbe.
Though I do see him in Chabad Houses throughout the world.
Reb Yid: a slight correction. You were in Satmar and saw a Satmar rebbe.
Reb Mottel,
In what way was the Rebbe's Torah unique? Even if he drew from many different paths in learning, when his Torah is viewed on a micro level it is not unique; it is merely representative of a certain dereh.
I fail to understand your statement - because the Rebbe's Torah was a unique synthesis of niglah and nistar - chikira in the tradition of Reb Yosef Engel, Reb Chaim Brisker and above all the Rogetshuver, combined with drush, kabalah and chassidus - that alone does not make it unique? All torah is based on the works of previous greats - kol mah shtalmid vasik asid l'chadish v'cho ( as explained in chassidus) - that doesn't mean the Rebbe's synthesis and own incites are not unique! What is more, the Rebbe's Rashi Sichos are entirely unprecedented in their analyses of every nuance of Rashi's wording and scholarship.
Your statement is akin to looking at a Rembrandt, a Monet and a Picaso and saying, "I hardly see how the three artists are unique - they all use the same primary colors in their pallet!"
Post a Comment