It was the custom of anti-Semites that when a Jew was unable to repay a debt, he would be cast into a deep pit. From a hole at the top, they would once a week lower bread and water, supposedly enough to sustain him for seven days. He remained in solitary confinement until the lord’s birthday, when the nobleman held a lavish feast and invited his peers. As their hearts grew merry with wine, the Jew would be brought in and ordered to dance for their entertainment. But this was no ordinary dance. They prepared a bearskin costume which the Jew had to wear, and he would be led into the chamber in iron chains by a servant, as if he were a real bear. The servant became his dancing partner, and the lord declared: “If you dance well, follow the music, and amuse us, you may go home a free man. If you dance better than your leader, you may even beat him, like a bear would a cow. But if you fail to please us, you will be taken to the dogs – and made to dance with them.” In the courtyard, wild and vicious dogs awaited. Should the Jew fail to entertain, he would be thrown to the dogs and immediately torn to shreds. The cruelty was compounded by the fact that the Jew, after a long period of near-starvation on bread and water, barely had the strength to walk, let alone dance in a heavy bearskin. In another passage from the same work, we are told of the town of Zlatopolye, where ignorance and boorishness reigned. The people knew nothing of netilat yadayim and had fundamental misunderstandings of the laws of family purity. They had no mikvah in town, and neighboring villages shared one mikvah, one etrog, one rabbi, and one shochet – all of dubious quality. Yet, they were obsessed with the office of shamash (sexton), whom they saw as a kind of scapegoat meant to absorb all communal misfortunes. Most notably, this was due to the dreaded tokhachah (section of rebuke in the Torah), read twice annually. A superstition held that anyone receiving that aliyah, unless a perfect saint (and wh…

I wish to express profound gratitude to Dr. Joseph B. Soloveitchik, Chairman of the Committee, who guided me in the selection of the topic of this dissertation, and whose counsel and criticism are reflected throughout the essay; and to the members of the Sponsoring Committee, whose assistance and encouragement proved invaluable: Dr. Gershon Churgin, Dr. Arthur Hyman, and Dr. Samuel K. Mirsky. Mr. Jacob I. Dienstag was unstinting in offering me direction in the location of many of the sources. I gratefully acknowledge the cooperation of the Copenhagen Communal Library which made available to me photostats of unpublished manuscript material used in this dissertation.

The study of Torah has always been accorded high significance in Judaism. The clearest formulation of this principle is given in the Mishnah: The study of Torah is equal to all the other precepts. Even more than merely "an integral part of Jewish piety," Talmud Torah was considered an act performed by God Himself: "The Holy One, blessed be He, The King of Kings of Kings...one third of the day He studies Bible and Mishnah.: Whether Talmud (study) is superior to Maaseh (deed, action) or to prayer,

Before R. Hayyim proceeds to elaborate his own definition of lishmah, he presents a brief criticism of the devotional interpretation of the Hasidim. The popularity of the Hasidic view equating lishmah with their version of devekut can be gauged by R. Hayyim's casual remark that this theory is held by "most of the world." The first evidence R. Hayyim offers in disputing the Hasidic thesis is a passage in Midrash Tehillim on the verse, "let the words of my mouth and the meditation of my heart be acceptable in Thy sight, O. Lord."

1. גדליה נגאל, ״מנהיג ועדה״ (על ר׳יעקב יוסף), 1962, חלק א׳ (113) 2. אברהם יצחק ברומברג,"הבעל שפת אמת מגור" (ספר ב' בסדרת "מגדולי החסידות") תשי"ג (127) 3. אברהם יצחק ברומברג, ״הכהן מלובלין״ (ספר /ז׳מגדוה״ח) תשי"ד (173) 4. הנ"ל, החוזה מלובלין״ (ספר י״ם מגדוה״ח) תשכ״ב (132) 5. הנ״ל, ״האדמו״ר מרוז׳ין" (ספר ו' מגדוה״ח) תשי״ג (184) 6. יוסף פאקם, ״רב מנחם מנדל מקוצק״ (מוסהר"ק) 1967 (116) 7. שמעון גליצנשטיין, ״האדמו״ר האמצעי" (ביתן הספר) (99) 8. ש.ה. הורודצקי, ״תורת רבי נחמן מברצלב ושיחותיו״ ברלין, תרפ״ג, (עמודים: 43-207 ,29-40 ,7-13) (ם"ה 181) 9. חיים מאיר היילמאן, ״בית רבי" (עד פרק כ"ג, ועד בכלל) (106) 10. בצלאל לנדוי, "הרבי ר' אלחמלך מליז׳ענסק" תשב״ג, 11. (עמודים:308-314 ,286-291 ,191-219 ,29 78-1 ,1-65 ) (55 1) 12. חיים יהודה ברל, ״ר׳ יצחק אייזיק מקאמארנא" (מוסהר"ק) 1965 (עמודים: 215-261 ,173-191 ,39-143) (155) 13. צבי מאיר רב י נ ו ב י ץ , ׳’המג י ד מקוז׳ניץ" ( תבו נ ה-מ ו סהר" ק) תש"ז (150)

Talks about אהבת ישראל – all Jews have origin of their souls in G-d – all come from one father; they are called אחים. But from the side of גוף they are not related; if they express only the צד הגופני they are not in a relationship of love (except love for an ulterior motive – not for the sake of love). Hence to express love must emphasize הנפש האלוקית [spiritual in superior to the material – but to reach G-d we don't deny

I. Sources. Descriptions of historians dealing with the Hasidic movement and an evaluation of their objectivity and bias. Includes Zweifel, Graetz, Dubnow, Cohen, Kahana, Buber, Scholem. II. Literature. Outline of Hasidic literature of first two generations of Hasidic thinkers and major writings of their opponents (Mitnagdim). III. Historical background. Political, economic, and social conditions of East European Jewry in end of 17th and early 18th centuries. The Kabbalah. Sabbatai Zevl and Jacob Frank. Proto-Hasidic writers. Christian sectarians and their influence. IV. MAJOR PERSONALITIES OF HASIDISM. The Besht — History and Legend. Jacob Joseph of Polonne. Pinhas of Koretz. Dov Ber of Mezerltch. Third generation leaders. V. MAJOR RELIGIOUS AND CULTURAL THEMES. Reading of Tzavaat Harivash. Antecedents of the themes. Corresponding emphasis in other Jewish movements and in non-Jewish religions. VI. PHILOSOPHICAL BASIS OF HASIDISM. Immanentism. Devekut. Antinomia tendencies. Kabbalah and Halakhah. Monism and Pluralism. Readings from Likkutei Amarim and Nefesh Hahayyim.

מחקרים. א) רבי נתן אדלר מפרנקפורט – דמיון ותופעות טרום־חסידיות (ר' דובגוב, "תולדות החסידות" ובדוק במקורות שהוא מביא; ולאחרונה במרדכי הלוי הורביץ, "רבני פרנקפורט", מוסד הרב קוק, 1972). ב) ר' בספרי, "תורה לשמה במשנת רבי חיים מוולוז'ין ובמחשבת הדור" – לקווים הכלליים של תורה לשמה ותורה שלא לשמה – והשווה לשיטות שהתפתחו במשנת האסכולסטיות הנוצרית. ג) ר' בספרי הנ"ל על הדעה, הן של גדולי המתנגדים הן של גדולי החסידים, על "לעולם ילמד אדם תורה שלא לשמה" וכו' – האם יש לזה מקור בתורת האר"י? (ר' י. תשבי, "תורת הרע והקליפה בקבלת האר"י", חלק ד', פרק א', עמ' קב–קה), והשווה למפרשים הקלאסיים על "יצר לב האדם רק רע מנעוריו", וגם – בעיקר – השווה לסופרים האנגליים והצרפתיים שהובאו שם. 2. עבודות. א) כתבה על המאורע הידוע של ליל שבת בקוצק – ר' בספרו החדש של פרופ' אברהם יהושע השל המנוח, "קוצק", כרך ב', עמ' 559–577, והשווה אלי ויזל בפרקו על קוצק. ב) השווה תולדות חיי הבעש"ט לפי המסורת המקובלת אצל רוב החסידים (ר' בביבליוגרפיה על החסידות) לחיי הבעש"ט במסורת חב"דית (ר' גליצנשטיין, "אור החסידות") – איך משתקפות ההשקפות השונות של החסידות בשינויים אלה בסיפור חייו של הבעש"ט? ג) כתבה סיכום של השיטות השונות בחסידות על התפילה, כפי שהן מובאות – סכם את היסודות המשותפים לכל החסידים בנושא זה ואת המחלוקות ביניהם. ד) השוואת שיטות בובר ושלום בתפיסתם את החסידות – מאמרו של בובר יימצא ב־Cahiers ואילו תשובתו של גרשום שלום יימצא בספרו. ה) מוניזם ופלורליזם בחסידות, בהתנגדות ובהלכה – הוויכוח בין וירצבורגר ולאם – מאמרו של הראשון ב־YIVO Annual ומאמרי שלי בספרי. ו) תפיסת הטבע בחסידות ובהתנגדות. 3. דוחים – רוב הספרונים דלהלן הם השוואה לפירושו של אלי ויזל בספרו: א) דוד קריגר, "הכהן מלובלין"; ב) פעדער, "ר' נחמן מברסלב"; ג) גרונברג, "שפת אמת"; ד) לאקם, "החוזה מלובלין"; ה) לפקוביץ, "קאמארנא"; ו) גוטמן, "רבי פנחס מקוריץ"; ז) ארף, "קוז'ניץ"; ח) "האדם ו־ר מצאנז".

1) Describe the character and career of the itinerant preacher, as he emerges from the tales and legends in "In Praise of the Baal Shem Tov." (For general context of Maggidim throughout history, see Jewish Encyclopedia, vol. VIII, pp. 252b ff., and Louis I. Newman, Maggidim and Hasidim Their wisdom, Bloch, 1964, pp. xliii-lv). Then compare results with Joseph G. Weiss, "A Circle of Pneumatics in Pre-Hasidism," Journal of Jewish Studies, VIII (1957).2\. Describe the self-image of the Besht, including his vocation as a writer of amulets, as it emerges from the stories in In Praise... . How does this self-image compare with what others thought of him?3\. Compare the self-image of the Besht, as evident from In Praise... with the self-image of R. Isaac Luria as it emerges from Tales in Praise of the Ari, by Klein (Jewish Publication Society, 1970).4\. Collect and delineate the anti-Rabbinic nuances in In Praise... and compare your results with the attitude of R. Yaakov Yosef of Polonnoye (see Dresner, The Zaddik...).5• Describe and analyze the attitudes of In Praise... to the following three groups: 1) Sabbatians, 2) Frankists, 3) Christians.6\. How does In Praise... deal with sexuality? What picture does it give of the mores of the shtetl of those days? What is its attitude to women?7• According to In Praise..., what were the relations between the Besht and R. Gershon of Kutov? - and R. Yaakov Yosef? - and the Great Maggid? On all three, cf. Wiesel, Souls on Fire.8\. Hasidic Thought as reflected in Hasidic music. See A.Z. Idelsohn, Jewish Music and its Historical Development, and Velvel Pasternak, Songs of the Chassidim.9• Compare the differing perspectives on the nature and value of Hasidic story-telling and legend of the following: 1) M. Buber (Introduction to Tales of the Hasidim; "Interpreting Hasidism," in Commentary, Sept. 1969), 2) Scholem ("Martin Buber’s Hasidism," in Commentary, Oct. 1961 – reprinted in his The Messianic Idea in Judaism, Schocken 1971), 3) Wi…

I. Background – A. Spiritual devastation of Polish Jewry by Sabbatian disaster. B. Dr. Cooper’s lecture on legends origin Besht (d.1760). II. Reaction to S.Z. – A. “Neutralized” Messianism, restored to original position. Deemphasized the eschatological. Toned down Messiah aspect of tikkun – sparks: spark-uplifting is by human effort, Messiah by divine grace. B. Hasidism originates in Podolia and Vohlinia – scene of most tragic Sabb’n failure. Need for security, certainty, leaders. C. But Has’idism much more than reaction to Sabb’n or dry Talmudism. III. Immanentism – A. Lurianic Doctrine of Sparks – M’maleh kol almin – where SZ: by intending good! Besht: redirecting (Freud! sublimation). B. Besht–Kotzk: “Lo yihyeh bekha El zar.” C. A “Adiaphora”: classical Rabbinism – only issur and heter (SZ – nothing); Hasidism – sanctify all life (Kook – before Buber! – the holy and the not-yet-holy). “Be’khol derakhekha da’ehu” – hence: eating, working, tying shoes; Enoch – cobbler – awl: unify Name, raise Sparks. D. R. Lebelle Eger: “Before I believed there’s a God; now I know.” IV. Deveikut – ecstatic, emotional. Constant communion – not by withdrawal, but by involvement. Berditchever on “tarbut Torah im derekh eretz” (contrast R.H. Volozhiner). Requires stimhah – external stimulus. (Story: Ropshitzer – why Hasidim drink schnapps – “shehakol”); dance, song – banish “le’ush.” V. Simplicity (Temimut) – cast lot on God – no worry. Not shy before God. Kozhnitzer: “Envy them! they’re already simple, I’m trying.” Hence: deemphasis Luria; anti-philosophic. “Atzaltavor! Greatest Hokhmah – to know there is more before Him.” Renglis: Destigmatization – dignity and status even to Am Haaretz. Story of prayer by whistle. VI. Spontaneity – in p’nimiyut (R. Barukh Medzibozer: “May I be struck dumb before I speak ‘beautifully’”). In prayer: hitlahavut (although often overdone, Tanya and R. Kalisker); emotional factor essential. “The niggun” – name Besht: violin player, dancers, and deveikut…