The last official Rebbe of the Lubavitcher Hasidim, Rabbi Menahem Mendel Schneerson, died on June 12, 1994. On Passover 1999 a group of these Orthodox Jewish Hassidim ran a provocative advertisement in a major newspaper referring to their Rebbe, “Long live our lord and master the King Messiah for ever and ever!” The Rebbe lives on, say these believers, and is in fact the Messiah for whom Jews have been waiting for millennia.
By saying and believing these words, this group of Jews has given life to a new religion. Their faith cannot simply be categorized as another sectarian version of Hasidism, of Orthodoxy or even of Judaism. On theological grounds, Judaism has steadfastly maintained a hope and faith in the future redemption of humankind by the Messiah in the Messianic Age to come. What defines Judaism and sets it apart from Christianity and other religions – among many of its major practices and beliefs – is the certainty that the Messiah has not come and that we must await the closure of his coming in our daily lives. I have sometimes mused that this essential belief may be a factor in the somewhat neurotic character of Jewish communal life – a constant edge of expectation stands at the official core of the Judaic religion and pervades its culture.
I have always seriously believed that the expectation of a future Messianic Age has bestowed upon Jews and into Judaism a deep inspiration to survive the darkest hours of history and a pure motivation to strive forward continuously in every way to progress toward that time of salvation – to bring on that redemption.
Theologically then it is contrary to the very essence of Judaism to proclaim and accept that a man who died five years ago is the living Messiah – no matter how exceptional the Rebbe may have been in his life and work. Those who hold fast to that essence – and act on it in their rituals – have formed a new religious system that cannot be classified as a form of Judaism.
How have Jews received the news of this Hasidic phenomenon? Some Jewish thinkers fear that the followers of that great Rebbe are doing him a great disservice by proclaiming on his behalf counter-intuitive statements of religious belief that are antithetical to Judaism. They say that these Hasidim are undoing the Rebbe’s good deeds and sullying the reputation that their own lord and master painstakingly accomplished over the decades of his tireless dedication to his followers.
Others Jewish spokesmen have implored the Hasidim to get their act together lest their enterprise break up into divisions – the messianists versus the anti-messianists – each wing weaker than the former single unified entity.
Whatever paths the Hasidim take, a new religion has been born and formed over the past five years. This has been clear from the moment the first Hasid denied the Rebbe’s death in 1994 and has become ever more lucid in the recent public declarations in advertisements, in their Hasidic singing and in all that these Lubavitcher Hasidim teach.
I think that crafting a new religion a good thing for the Hasidim and for the traditional forms of Judaism that they have left behind. The creativity of a new religious and cultural entity brings excitement and energy to the world – new sparks that may kindle a light of redemption for all who come in contact with it. I extend a warm welcome then to "Chabad Lubavitchism" – a new religion among the many living faiths of the twenty first century.
1/10/07
Chabad: A New Religion?
In 1999 this was my op-ed take on the rebbe and the messiah. I agree with it today.
Hi Tzvee. You titled your post, "Chabad, a new religion?" Don't you mean "Meshichism, a new religion?" Y'see, your essay is predominantly about a group *within* Chabad who has broken ties with traditional Jewish belief, but your final sentence, as you wrote it, is about "Chabad Lubavitchism, a new religion." Which group exactly are you calling a new religion? That's nothing short of sloppy. I could see why Professor Berger has some issues with your take on the subject.
ReplyDelete==
"The creativity of a new religious and cultural entity brings excitement and energy to the world"
What you probably mean to say is, "The creativity of a new religious and cultural entity, *could* bring excitement and energy to the world." Of course, it could also bring tragedy, but that addition would bring down the mood of your essay.
==
Did you honestly expect to win the hearts of "Chabad Lubavitchers" with your "warm welcome" of them as a "new religion among the many living faiths"?
From my point of view as an historian of religions in 1999 it looked to me like Chabad had crossed over and become a new religion. Though they remain faithful to the Torah and Mitzvot, their social structures, missionary activities, and overt valorization of the rebbe as messiah were sufficient evidence to me to make that call. I still agree with that conclusion and since then see new evidence that the facts have become more solid.
ReplyDeleteI do not agree that Berger is accurate in many of his observations and conclusions. If you are a professor you have a responsibility in a book to speak as one. He does not. Yes, he is forthright in saying his book is a personal memoir. So I cannot say he misrepresents what he does. He does admit to his emotional involvement in the issue throughout the book. That diminishes its value. He also admits to his original naivete about Chabad. That further undermines his program. His invocation of the Rambam over and over as a club to beat the Hasidim is tiring and pointless. They know the text and obviously have other ways of dealing with it. The interpretation of medieval texts is not a valid way to analyze what is happening in your own present world.
Next, The program of his memoir is vindictive. He calls for the condemnation of a vibrant group whose views and activities he calls heresy. He condemns his own group for not rising up against them, a passivity that he calls a scandal.
Next, to say that there are meshichists and non-meshichists in Chabad is a transparent apologetic.
Next, I cannot predict the future. I do find in front of my nose evidence of new creative energy in Chabad. I wish other forms of religion would try to generate some.
I appreciate your thoughtful response.
ReplyDelete"He also admits to his original naivete about Chabad. That further undermines his program."
I don't agree.
"to say that there are meshichists and non-meshichists in Chabad is a transparent apologetic."
Maybe, maybe not. It depend on their percentages.
"(Berger) calls for the condemnation of a vibrant group whose views and activities he calls heresy."
I know you don't call for their condemnation, but don't *you* call their views 'heresy'? If not that exact word, then the exact sentiment? Your quote was "Those who hold fast to that essence – and act on it in their rituals – have formed a new religious system that cannot be classified as a form of Judaism." So, while Berger "condemns," you write them out of Judaism. Frankly, I'd rather be condemned.