The late Lubavitcher Rebbe Menachem Mendel Schneerson zt"l had no successor as the rebbe of Chabad-Lubavitch. Why is this? Was it simply because he had no children? If so, why was nobody else appointed to be the rebbe?
Answer
There are, perhaps, several factors to consider:
In Chabad thought, the rebbe is more than just a leader, Torah teacher, spiritual guide, etc. All of these roles, and many more, are outgrowths and expressions of his being the נשמה כללית, the "all-encompassing soul" of the Jewish people (see Tanya, ch. 2).
Now, of course, barring an explicit statement by Chabad rebbe A that potential successor B has a נשמה כללית, there's really no way to know who's the bearer of one. But by and large throughout Chabad history, the successor was essentially "voted in" - often against his will - by consensus of the elder chassidim, which in retrospect means that they had Divine assistance in determining who that person should be. If, then, there has been no movement in that direction, then that may well indicate that there simply is no one suitable. (What deeper reasons there might be for Hashem to cause things to be this way? Perhaps the one indicated in Josh's answer, or perhaps others; אין לי עסק בנסתרות - I have no business with hidden matters.)
On a more down-to-earth level, the dynastic principle is very strongly embedded in Chabad history: in the "main line" of succession, every rebbe since R. Schneur Zalman has been his predecessor's son or son-in-law. (This is also true of the Chabad dynasties that branched off from the Tzemach Tzedek's second through fourth sons.) The groups that instead followed a disciple from outside the family (R. Aharon of Strashelye, R. Avraham Dovber Levine) were, then as now, considered schismatic. Practically speaking, then, with the Rebbe having been childless and his other brothers-in-law (the Previous Rebbe had no sons) having passed away before him, there is no one who would meet that criterion.
To address Shalom's point about plans and foresight: במחילת כבודו, that I think the premise of his answer is a bit mistaken. There were actually very few cases where the Lubavitcher rebbeim designated their successors (even when there were multiple possible candidates); in fact I don't believe any of them ever explicitly said, "X should be the next rebbe." The closest are the Tzemach Tzedek directing the Maharash to start delivering original maamarim (winter 5626, a few months before his own passing), and the Rashab similarly directing the Rayatz in his will to say Chassidus publicly. (The latter case was during the upheaval following the Russian revolution, which obviously was a situation where no uncertainty could be tolerated - and even then the Rayatz was reluctant to fully accept the position until, as in point 1, he was pressed into it by the chassidim. As for the Tzemach Tzedek, that his directive wasn't seen as necessarily designating a successor is proven by the simple fact that three of his other sons also accepted positions as Chabad rebbeim, albeit in other towns.)
Of course, each of the rebbeim can be seen in retrospect to have groomed their successors for the position, but much of that was by assigning them responsibilities - which they did to their other sons, sons-in-law and other people close to them as well, so that's hardly dispositive. [Consider the Previous Rebbe: he appointed his oldest son-in-law the Rashag as director of Tomchei Tmimim, and his second son-in-law the Ramash (the Rebbe) as director of Merkos, Machaneh Yisroel and Kehot (his third son-in-law R. Mendel Horenstein was killed in the Holocaust) - but in addition there were responsibilities parceled out to many others as well, such as R. Nissan Mindel, R. Chaim Mordechai Aizik Hodakov, etc. When the Previous Rebbe passed away, then, there was a minority of chassidim who held out for the Rashag, a majority for the Ramash, and so far as I know no one considered anyone else as even a possibility.]
No comments:
Post a Comment