Rabbi Micha Berger wrote to "Chabad - can only be understood from inside by tho...":
Yes, the seifer says that Hashem is revealed through the tzadiq. And then, without explaining the jump, he then speaks of the tzadiq's total bittul meaning that only Hashem is there.
The rebbe spoke of Atzmus uMahus, not nevu'ah or even "Shechinah". The language is quite specific and intense, speaking of the Core Self (Atzmus) which in the case of humans he contrasts with any thoughts we might have. He may give sources for saying that person can see G-d through a tzaddiq who acts entirely according to Hashem's Will, but then he does leap (that's the conflation I spoke about yesterday) from there to saying that G-d Himself -- emphasizing through repetition of words for Divine Essence (not Or Ein Sof), Atzmuso uMahuso -- is within the Tzadiq.
You write: "Thus, when the Tzaddik speaks, it is not he who speaks, but Hashem who speaks through him, and this is the same explanation for the pesukim that speak about malachim with shem Hashem..."
(FWIW, the Rambam gives a totally different explanation, since people only communicate with mal'akhim in the body of nevu'ah.)
Notice that your argument leads you to say that a tzadiq speaks in accordance with Hashem's will, "asei Retzono kirtzonkha". And then you leap from their to say it's Hashem doing the talking. It's the same fallacy. And it's not only a flawed argument, it's a theology most rabbanim would label apiqursus.
"Ah rebbe iz atzmus umahus vos hot zich areingeshtelt in a guf
ReplyDeleteA Rebbe is [Divine] Essence and Existence which has clothed itself in a body." "Likutei Sichos", vol 2 page 509
The New Testament also describes the revelation of God in the human form.
Hebrews 1:1-2:
"has in these last days spoken to us in the form of a Son whom he appointed to be the heir of everything and through whom he also made the universe."
And in I Timothy 3:16,
- - "God was manifested in the flesh"
John 1:1 - "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God."
John 1:14 - "And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth."
Col. 2:9 - "For in Him all the fullness of Deity dwells in bodily form."
Phil. 2:6-8 -Who, being in very nature God,.....but made himself nothing,taking the very nature of a servant, being made in human likeness.And being found in appearance as a man.
micha,
ReplyDeleteI don't see any "leap". Multiple sources are given that Hashem Himself speaks through a Tzadik. That is what the Rebbe is saying in the sicha. It's clear when one understands the sources what that means.
Elsewhere throughout Chabad Chassidus we find the discussion of the famous statements of Chazal: "man pnei Adon Hashem do Rashbi"; "Ano simono be'almo"; "asidim tzadikim she'yomru lifneihem kodosh"--where Chazal are obviously trying to tell us something important--and others. The explanation of Chabad Chassidus (I can cite some sources, though it's best to buy the sefer Al HaTzadikim) is that Hashem is revealed in and through the Tzaddik because of his bittul to Hashem. I.e., not that the entity of the Tzadik is itself ch"v (as the misnagdim persist in twisting the Rebbe's words to be saying ch"v), but that on the contrary, BECAUSE the Tzadik is in a state of total bittul, i.e., he has no independent metzius (existence), therefore Hashem is able to reveal Himself THROUGH the Tzaddik. That's what I wrote in my last post.
To somehow take this as if it's being said that the Tzadik IS etc. ch"v, when the meaning of the revelation of G-dliness in Tzadikim is being explained very clearly so that no one could think that it means what some people are twisting it to mean, is downright disingenuous, and that's an understatement.
As for the Rambam: So, the Rambam may give a different explanation--so? Shivim ponim laTorah. This is the one given in Chassidus in many places, as cited in the sefer Al HaTzadikim.
For those who want an english version of the sicha see http://www.sichosinenglish.org/books/proceeding-together-1/12.htm
ReplyDeleteI am confused why everyone is harping on this sicha, when in fact the original source for this idea is in the Tanya itself. Likutei Amarim Chapter 2:
See here: http://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/7881/jewish/Chapter-2.htm
Key line: "The second, uniquely Jewish, soul is truly “a part of G-d above,”
Another important source regarding this topic is this article by Rabbi Immanuel Schochet.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.chabadtalk.com/forum/attachment.php3?s=2ebda757c70c43b0a446c55ac559fac5&attachmentid=2&d=1009095431
Key quote: It should be noted, though, that the Rebbe appears to have anticipated this tragic malignity three decades before the birth of the lunatic fringe, and way before the "discovery" of his words by the mitnagdim in the 1980's: in the reprints of this
discourse in Kuntres Yud Shvat (published in the 1960's), and in Sefer Hama'amarim Bati Legani (New York 1977, p. 277)
he ordered the deletion of the "controversial" phrase!