Which seems very puzzling: Isn’t being less megusham, less fargrebt, our goal and aim? If the Alter Rebbe was successful in helping his chassidim reach that goal, isn’t that itself a positive thing? In fact, if someone is definitely not a Rebbe, but he can teach me how to be less preoccupied with my worldly desires, wouldn’t that itself be enough of a reason to go to him? Shouldn’t that itself be enough to qualify him as a genuine Rebbe?
In fact, don’t even goyim – lehavdil – respect self-control, and not being a “fresser” (although, perhaps not as much...)? Isn’t it a multi-million-dollar industry, to teach people to eat healthily and only as is needed etc. What, in fact, was his complaint to the Rebbe?
Imagine you’re talking with a Gerer chosid about why he went to the tisch of Reb Shaul, and he explains to you that by Reb Yankel, he didn’t enjoy taavos of olam hazeh. Reb Shaul taught him how to be immersed in worldly pleasures again; how to enjoy a steak and relish a roll of sushi, and for that he earned his everlasting gratitude. Huh?! That wouldn’t make any sense! A Rebbe that earns your respect is the one that guides you to be more refined and eidel, even if he doesn’t have any other qualities. What could be the logic of Reb Shmuel Munkes’ declaration to the Alter Rebbe? And, most importantly, what is the lesson that we can – and need to – learn from it?
Perhaps, the explanation is elementary. But I will preface with a story (heard from Reb Yoel, a”h, by a Yudtes Kislev farbrengen a few years ago):
There was once a bochur who was learning in a Litvishe Yeshiva. This bochur was academically challenged, and had a very hard time mastering the material that he was learning (this was back in the days before the roshei teivos and letters and labels, and they had to just describe it as it is...). Now, in all of the pep talks in the Yeshiva there, the bochurim were told that if they learn well, they have a chance of becoming the next godol b’Yisroel. But, this bochur, seeing that he was much behind his peers, didn’t see that possibility as practical for him. He didn’t know, therefore, how to motivate himself to put the right amount of effort into his learning. He discussed his dilemma with his mashgiach and roshei yeshiva, but none could offer him a satisfactory solution. One told him that he could still be hopeful to become a ‘half a godol’. But the bochur was unimpressed. ‘Why should I work as hard as (or harder than) my chaveirim and get less out of it?’ Another member of his hanholoh suggested that maybe he can seek fulfillment in a yissochor-zevulun pact (with him being the Zevulun), but, again, he felt he was being short-changed. Finally, one of them suggested to him to write to the Lubavitcher Rebbe. The bochur followed his advice, and received the following reply from the Rebbe: “What is a ‘godol’, and what does it mean to be a ‘godol’? A godol means to be connected to the Eibishter, and the more connected to the Eibishter you are, the greater you are and the more of a ‘godol’ you are. So, you can be as much of a godol as the next guy!”. This reply reassured the bochur, and gave him the motivation he was seeking.
To paraphrase the question in the Rebbe’s reply (in the story): What is Yiddishkeit? Yiddishkeit is not merely knowing a lot of Torah. Nor is it being a holy, refined, impressive, chassidishe Yid. Yiddishkeit is serving, worshipping, the Eibishter. As our Chazal teach us – כל הכופר בע״ז נקיהודי, anyone who rejects idolatry, and accepts the Eibishter as the only G-d and ein od milvado, is a Yid! Someone can be very refined, but for other reasons, not as a means of being connected to Elokus. That is not a virtue at all. Rejecting taavos olam hazeh is something positive when it is part of our general endeavoring to be more attached to Elokus. Otherwise, it is insignificant and meaningless.
And being connected with the Eibishter, that is what we have a Rebbe for, and that – and only that – is what a Rebbe is all about!! Reb Shmuel Munkes said to the Alter Rebbe, perhaps, if you’re (ch”v) not a Rebbe, if this isn’t part of אנכי עומד ביניכם לבין אלקיכם להגיד לכם את דבר ה', part of you connecting us with Elokus – then it is worthless, it is just causing Jews misery with no benefit or justification. Not deriving enjoyment from olam hazeh, iskafya, is something positive only when it is a part of our avodas Hashem, which is possible only when it is through the guidance of an authentic Rebbe.
Yiddishkeit is not being holy or spiritual or pious or virtuous. It is one thing and one thing only – worshipping Hashem, by doing what He commands and what He wants from us.
To give a practical application to this thought: Sometimes, when we’re davening, or learning, or being maavir sedra, we will be rushing. Obviously, if you’re rushing through your davening so that you can eat a bigger (and better) breakfast, then you’re altogether a beheima! But, sometimes you may be rushing it because you’re in a rush for something chassidish. You’re rushing to a farbrengen, or to make a chidush in Torah. You’re going to some activity in which you will feel and experience the (spiritual) benefit (unlike learning Rambam or being maavir sidra, where you don’t feel anything, other than doing what you have to do). But you may be having it all wrong. “Chassidishkeit” (just like Yiddishkeit) consists not of what feels chassidish or looks refined or smells holy. Chassidishkeit is – through the directives of our Rebbeim – being connected with Atzmus Einsof BH. It is being exclusively preoccupied with, and yearning for, that connection. All the specifics that we do are merely the means of bringing about that connection.
So, if you are doing something that the Eibishter wants, there is nothing more pressing or more important for you in the world. [The Rebbe recorded how the Frierdige Rebbe described the manner in which his father, the Rebbe Rashab, would be maavir sedra. He said an observer would think he is someone who doesn’t have a care or concern in the world, and there is nothing else competing for his attention. At that time, there was nothing else that matters]. If he is Rebbe, if it is a connection with Elokus, then that is all that matters.
[In the times of the Baal Shem Tov, there was once a kitrug, a prosecution, against Yidden. The root of the kitrug was the fact that there was a galoch then, a priest, who was לָא רָאָה מִימָיו..., and this caused critique against Yidden, who were not at that standard. The Baal Shem Tov became aware of the kitrug, and made a point of meeting the galoch. The BeSHT got into a conversation with him about marriage, and why it would be a very good idea for him etc., and described vividly how pleasurable that can be etc., until the state that the galoch was in ended, putting the kitrug to rest. Which raises a question: How was it right for the BeSHT to bring about such a terrible thing to the galoch (like חטא בשביל שיזכה חביריך)? The answer is, seemingly, that the galoch was a goy, a rosho. His achievement, therefore, had nothing to do with the Eibishter, and was not a virtue. It was merely a liability for Yidden, so the BeSHT made sure it should end...].
Reb Shmuel Munkes was expressing the idea, perhaps, that iskafya, itself, as holy and lofty as it seems, is not a virtue. The virtue is when it is coming from the guidance of the Rebbe, part of our journey to connect with the Eibishter. (Perhaps this can give further insight into the response of the Alter Rebbe, who didn’t assert that he was wrong or right, but merely that the idea was arguable, VAKML).
