It is very unfortunate that so much discussion about Chabad in much of the Orthodox world revolves so much around the messianism instead of how the messianism is part of larger societal issues. To act as if it is an appendage of the movement that can be easily ignored when just looking at the rest ignores these bigger issues.
The irony is that since the debate messianism engenders makes these larger issues less discussed. In many ways, it is very convenient for Chabad to have the discussion focused there.
The messianism is just an outgrowth of an extremist ideology that is not, as you say, just about getting Jews to “do mitzvahs.” It is about missionizing. The framing of this around mitzvahs as opposed to this larger goal is itself part of a sales pitch, not an honest view of their approach.
Part of what you miss here is that you take a lot of the sale pitch as fact, when it is actually itself deceptive. For example, the claim that it is a debate between messianics and the anti-messianics is also a deceptive sales pitch spread by people who want to ensure that those turned off by their belief in the Rebbe as messiah aren’t turned of. The actual debate, the true one happening within Chabad as opposed to directed towards its missionized targets, is whether they should be *public* about their belief that the Rebbe is the messiah. In a sense, those considered more extreme are really just more honest and less deceptive, because the fact is that most Chabadniks, *especially* shluchim, consider the Rebbe the messiah.
Confusing Chabad as it is with its public talking points is of course the whole reason those talking points exist. But this is why you can’t divorce discussions of messianism from Chabad as a whole. Because the real issue is that the deception in this issue is about the deception used to target college students, people in delicate emotional states, and anyone looking for meaning who also happens to not be familiar enough with Judaism, especially its orthodox elements, to understand what they’re signing up for.
Ultimately, until you reconcile with this deception as well as the inherent toxicity of ANY group that missionizes, you will be talking about public talking points instead of reality.
There are people who are touchy about the first part of the Kuzari sec. 2. In it he says that the born Jew is different in kind than other human beings. R Yehudah haLevi expands the Classical Greek notion that there are 4 kinds of souls – inanimate, growing (plants), living (animals), and speaking (people) - with a fifth, the born Jew. (So, first generation converts are out. I said the idea is troubling!)
But this is at least putting all of humanity ona pedestal. Even if it builds a higher pedestal for Jews.
The Zohar and Ari believe that Jewish souls come from a higher place than non-Jewish ones. In fact, kosher animals' souls also are rooted in this higher place. That is why we may eat kosher animals, but not ones that will pull our souls down. Whereas non-Jewish souls come from the same qelipah (husk blocking Divibe Light) as non-kosher animals. So there is no risk to them.
Cows' souls allegedly are rooted in a more G-dly place than Chiune Sugihara's zt"l?! Really?!
The Tanya, starting in the very first chapter and revisited a number of times takes this yet further. He says that non-Jews have only an animal soul and no G-dly one, and therefore no inclination to do good in and of itself. Only for ulterior motives.
This gets toned down with time, but the basic thesis is in their fundamental texts and cannot be fully uprooted.
I think this approach to non-Jews would bother most Chabad House attendees more than the messianic issue.
It is very unfortunate that so much discussion about Chabad in much of the Orthodox world revolves so much around the messianism instead of how the messianism is part of larger societal issues. To act as if it is an appendage of the movement that can be easily ignored when just looking at the rest ignores these bigger issues.
The irony is that since the debate messianism engenders makes these larger issues less discussed. In many ways, it is very convenient for Chabad to have the discussion focused there.
The messianism is just an outgrowth of an extremist ideology that is not, as you say, just about getting Jews to “do mitzvahs.” It is about missionizing. The framing of this around mitzvahs as opposed to this larger goal is itself part of a sales pitch, not an honest view of their approach.
Part of what you miss here is that you take a lot of the sale pitch as fact, when it is actually itself deceptive. For example, the claim that it is a debate between messianics and the anti-messianics is also a deceptive sales pitch spread by people who want to ensure that those turned off by their belief in the Rebbe as messiah aren’t turned of. The actual debate, the true one happening within Chabad as opposed to directed towards its missionized targets, is whether they should be *public* about their belief that the Rebbe is the messiah. In a sense, those considered more extreme are really just more honest and less deceptive, because the fact is that most Chabadniks, *especially* shluchim, consider the Rebbe the messiah.
Confusing Chabad as it is with its public talking points is of course the whole reason those talking points exist. But this is why you can’t divorce discussions of messianism from Chabad as a whole. Because the real issue is that the deception in this issue is about the deception used to target college students, people in delicate emotional states, and anyone looking for meaning who also happens to not be familiar enough with Judaism, especially its orthodox elements, to understand what they’re signing up for.
Ultimately, until you reconcile with this deception as well as the inherent toxicity of ANY group that missionizes, you will be talking about public talking points instead of reality.
I can wait. If it turns out that the messiah is Kal-El, I’ll deal with it then.
There are people who are touchy about the first part of the Kuzari sec. 2. In it he says that the born Jew is different in kind than other human beings. R Yehudah haLevi expands the Classical Greek notion that there are 4 kinds of souls – inanimate, growing (plants), living (animals), and speaking (people) - with a fifth, the born Jew. (So, first generation converts are out. I said the idea is troubling!)
But this is at least putting all of humanity ona pedestal. Even if it builds a higher pedestal for Jews.
The Zohar and Ari believe that Jewish souls come from a higher place than non-Jewish ones. In fact, kosher animals' souls also are rooted in this higher place. That is why we may eat kosher animals, but not ones that will pull our souls down. Whereas non-Jewish souls come from the same qelipah (husk blocking Divibe Light) as non-kosher animals. So there is no risk to them.
Cows' souls allegedly are rooted in a more G-dly place than Chiune Sugihara's zt"l?! Really?!
The Tanya, starting in the very first chapter and revisited a number of times takes this yet further. He says that non-Jews have only an animal soul and no G-dly one, and therefore no inclination to do good in and of itself. Only for ulterior motives.
This gets toned down with time, but the basic thesis is in their fundamental texts and cannot be fully uprooted.
I think this approach to non-Jews would bother most Chabad House attendees more than the messianic issue.
Is the book good tho?
I thought so
Kind of a critical ppint to leave.out of a book review.
This isn't a book review
They name of the substack misled me....
A freilechen Purim!