Welcome to the Home Work page for JHist '11. Every Monday and Tuesday (or sometimes Wednesday) I'll post some artifact and look for your great questions.
Monday, October 11, 2010
HW 10/12 - 10/13
Map of the Spread of Hassidism throughout Eastern Europe (Poland, Russia, The Ukraine, and Austria-Hungary). Questions are do by WEDNESDAY at 11:59pm.
From the information we are given about this map it seems like the spread of Hassidim grew and expanded earlier on, and then as years went by they stopped flourishing as much. Why? Now, the norm is for us to get better. AKA the more time that goes by, the more we flourish. This makes me wonder if a traumatic event happened during the time period of the 1700's that made it harder to be a Hassid. It also seems as if Hassidism only really spread to a small area (to the right of Austria-Hungary), even at their best time. Why do you think it was so hard for people to take on Hassidism? Isn't it more lax then being Orthodox anyway? Why wouldn't the Jews during that time flock to this "new" idea?
Why are so many of the communities clustered together towards the southern part of the map?
Not all Hassidim are like the Breslov Hassidim- constantly singing, dancing, and promoting Hassidism through the streets, but for the basis of my argument let’s assume Hassidim in the same community are going to be a close knit group that attends each others simchas. Large groups of people congregating, to sing and dance, whether it be for a wedding, a brit, or just a sing along are going to need a place to gather. In the 1700’s there weren’t large ballrooms or massive shuls where they could have these events, so they would have to hold them outside. The fact that the majority of the Hassidim had their communities south of Russia, may not have to do with war, or enemies, or any other act of malice toward them, but could be a result of temperature. If the community wanted to have an event with singing and dancing, but it was cold outside, then people wouldn’t want to dance and enjoy the joyous occasion, whatever it may be. Therefore, communities settled in the warmer climates, closer to the equator, in order so they could continue with their singing and dancing.
At the beginning Hasidism covered more ground but spread to much fewer communities than it did a few years later when it spread to much more communities in more condensed areas. What could be the significance of this correlation.
This map shows that Hasidism spread more as time went on. The Besht at the time was Israel Ben Eliezer, who died in 1960. I find it odd that in the leader's last years the Hassidim were able to be motivated to spread so much more than they had before. Rabbi Dov Ber took over the leadership role of the Hassidim once Israel Ben Eliezer died. And from then on Hasidism attracted many more jews and spread as far as America. Was it the death of Israel Ben Eliezer that inspired the Hassidim to excel in their spreading? And what was it that Rabbi Dov Ber did that made hasidim prosper in the years to come as well?
Like other cultures in Europe did Hassidism spread through commerce, or through the military conquest of their native communities,through population growth,or through religious expansion? Secondly, was the growth of Hassidim a unique phenomenon to the Russian pale settlement?
In this map it shows the spread of Hassidism all over Europe and Russia. We can see that many Jews liked this type of Judaism and went along with Rabbi Nachmun. Why did the spread of Hassidism spread all over Eastern Europe but it didn't seem to make it to America or the rest of the world?
Looking at the map one sees Hasidim taking root in Poland and Russia, the poorer parts of Europe. What does the absence the richer parts of Europe not taking part in this revolution show? What deeper societal structures of the poor of Europe are brought to light?
I notice that the border of the complete halt of expansion is Vilna, the main centre of opposition. Obviously this was the territory of the Vilna Gaon (1720-1797). What particular beef did the Vilna Gaon have with Hassids? Weren’t they just trying to bring new life and excitement to Judaism? Furthermore, the Hassids were gaining serious ground, how was the Vilna Gaon, despite their momentum, so successful in stopping their expansion. Perhaps the reason lies in that the Hassids respected the Gaon's territory, but even so, word of mouth would have reached the citizens of Vilna and gotten their attention. What made the Vilna Gaon such a powerful force? Lastly, was the Vilna Gaon solely responsible for the halting of the Hassid movement? I know generalizations like this are tough to make, but it seems a man as powerful as the Vilna Gaon is capable of this feat.
It's rather strange that the top 10 hasidic population centers don't match up with the prominent jewish and general population centers of that time. Generally religous sects of that time gained support in cities, as opposed to more rustic scenes. Rural people have historically held on to their religion much closer. So why in this case is it different? -Joey Rubinstein
The map specifies that in Lithuania, near the area of Vilna, is where the center of opposition to Hasidism arose. Vilna's leader in the mid-late 1700's, Rabbi Eliyahu ben Shlomo Zalman, commonly known as the Vilna Gaon, is known to have been a spokesman for Misnagdim, those opposed to the Hasidic movement, and thus the map's statement about the area around Vilna appears to hold some historical truth. What could have caused this opposition to Hasidism, a movement that was spreading rapidly throughout Eastern Europe and that apparently emphasized greater piety and a closer relationship to G-D? Could the Misnagdim have feared that this was no different than the Messianic movement of Shabtai Zvi and that Europe was about to be disillusioned once again? Were they just stubborn or scared people who refused to accept other forms of religion? Did they believe that Hasidism was a drastic turn away from their Judaism? Or, perhaps, were there other concerns? Is it possible that Hasidism's emphasis on visions and miracles was deemed unnecessary or implausible by a sect of Jews who had been too hurt by similarly professed miracles from the time of Shabtai Tzvi? Or were they opposition simply for the sake of being opposition? Are there a number of factors which led to this rise of opposition (and the two people placed in cherem)?
In this map the Hassidum were almost in every country. How did they get that many people? were there more Hassidum back then then we have Jews today? and how did they get so mcuh land? were there Hassidum tyrants?
The main "position" of the opposition to the Hassidic movement is quite a distance away from the early areas of the Hassidic groups that sprouted 1730-60. How long did it take for this opposition to develop and why? Did many people even know about Hassidim in the early 1700s? Were the Hassidic groups more secretive or were they more open when they first started?
the map indicates that hasidism spread much more from 1760-1775 than it did from 1730-1760. what about after 1775? did the spread of hasidism lessen and gradually stop? or did it continue to spread greatly around that are? -david reiz
i noticed that the area depicted as the center of hassidism is mostly in the Ukraine and Poland. why is it that hassidism the sect of judaism that is the most out there and exposed as being jewish came into existance in the area where historicly jews have been the most persecuted. also why is it that uman the center of one of the most prominent hassidic movements was at the far sothern edge of hassidic expansion wouldn't it have expand south from there too not just north or is it that at the time there were not many jews south of uman in the balkans because it was a primarily muslim ottoman controlled region
p.s can you send me the link for mondays question the video still wont show up on my computer.
regardless of the year the spread of hassidut into poland and austria is limited mainly to the periphery. was this a decision the hassids made on their own (to remain on the edges)or was this due to a state or socially enforced law? if it was their choice was it because they where happy where they were (i highly doubt this because of the magnitude of the spread. if this were the case the expansion wouldn't have been so great.)? or was it from fear of what lay further into the country? and if it was because of some rule enforced by some entity within the state (government or otherwise) why was this rule there? what did they have against hassids? (im leaning towards the latter because the spread into the periphery in these countries came in the second wave. if it were the hassids choice i think they would have spread there asap.)
Back then, becoming a chassidic jew was very common and so many people felt like they needed to become a Chassidic jew. This is a big change because being a Chassidic jew is harder and has more rules then just being orthodox. Now a days being orthodox (im assuming) is more common and, being chassidic is like being a completely different type of jew and is not as common. Why do the majority of jews now feel like being orthodox is the right type of lifestyle that god wants us to live by. Why did people back then feel like being a chassidic jew was so much better and right? Did they actually believe that thats the lifestyle god wants us to live our lives like or is there another reason why people chose to be chassidic and not orthodox?
Were the rapidly expanding hassidim able to coexist to a certain extent with the misnagdim living in the midsts, or did two separate and contentious communities form? Likely, the truth exists somewhere in the middle. The hassic strongholds seem to be staying away from Vilna, likely due to the efforts of the Vilna Goan, but did hassidim try influencing the more traditional Jews in Vilna and elsewhere?
In an article I was reading (http://nassauweekly.com/articles/718/), it mentioned that the city called Lyubavichi was actually the home base for the Lubavich movement. This movement included the uprising of the Chabad system. All of this started around the year 1745. How did the Lubavich movement affect the movement as a whole? Since Chabad is still influencing people now, could the Hassidic movement still be taking place? -Aaron Zuckerman
From the information we are given about this map it seems like the spread of Hassidim grew and expanded earlier on, and then as years went by they stopped flourishing as much. Why? Now, the norm is for us to get better. AKA the more time that goes by, the more we flourish. This makes me wonder if a traumatic event happened during the time period of the 1700's that made it harder to be a Hassid. It also seems as if Hassidism only really spread to a small area (to the right of Austria-Hungary), even at their best time. Why do you think it was so hard for people to take on Hassidism? Isn't it more lax then being Orthodox anyway? Why wouldn't the Jews during that time flock to this "new" idea?
ReplyDeleteWhy are so many of the communities clustered together towards the southern part of the map?
ReplyDeleteNot all Hassidim are like the Breslov Hassidim- constantly singing, dancing, and promoting Hassidism through the streets, but for the basis of my argument let’s assume Hassidim in the same community are going to be a close knit group that attends each others simchas. Large groups of people congregating, to sing and dance, whether it be for a wedding, a brit, or just a sing along are going to need a place to gather. In the 1700’s there weren’t large ballrooms or massive shuls where they could have these events, so they would have to hold them outside. The fact that the majority of the Hassidim had their communities south of Russia, may not have to do with war, or enemies, or any other act of malice toward them, but could be a result of temperature. If the community wanted to have an event with singing and dancing, but it was cold outside, then people wouldn’t want to dance and enjoy the joyous occasion, whatever it may be. Therefore, communities settled in the warmer climates, closer to the equator, in order so they could continue with their singing and dancing.
At the beginning Hasidism covered more ground but spread to much fewer communities than it did a few years later when it spread to much more communities in more condensed areas. What could be the significance of this correlation.
ReplyDeleteThis map shows that Hasidism spread more as time went on. The Besht at the time was Israel Ben Eliezer, who died in 1960. I find it odd that in the leader's last years the Hassidim were able to be motivated to spread so much more than they had before. Rabbi Dov Ber took over the leadership role of the Hassidim once Israel Ben Eliezer died. And from then on Hasidism attracted many more jews and spread as far as America. Was it the death of Israel Ben Eliezer that inspired the Hassidim to excel in their spreading? And what was it that Rabbi Dov Ber did that made hasidim prosper in the years to come as well?
ReplyDeleteLike other cultures in Europe did Hassidism spread through commerce, or through the military conquest of their native communities,through population growth,or through religious expansion? Secondly, was the growth of Hassidim a unique phenomenon to the Russian pale settlement?
ReplyDeleteIn this map it shows the spread of Hassidism all over Europe and Russia. We can see that many Jews liked this type of Judaism and went along with Rabbi Nachmun. Why did the spread of Hassidism spread all over Eastern Europe but it didn't seem to make it to America or the rest of the world?
ReplyDeleteLooking at the map one sees Hasidim taking root in Poland and Russia, the poorer parts of Europe. What does the absence the richer parts of Europe not taking part in this revolution show? What deeper societal structures of the poor of Europe are brought to light?
ReplyDeleteI notice that the border of the complete halt of expansion is Vilna, the main centre of opposition. Obviously this was the territory of the Vilna Gaon (1720-1797). What particular beef did the Vilna Gaon have with Hassids? Weren’t they just trying to bring new life and excitement to Judaism?
ReplyDeleteFurthermore, the Hassids were gaining serious ground, how was the Vilna Gaon, despite their momentum, so successful in stopping their expansion.
Perhaps the reason lies in that the Hassids respected the Gaon's territory, but even so, word of mouth would have reached the citizens of Vilna and gotten their attention. What made the Vilna Gaon such a powerful force?
Lastly, was the Vilna Gaon solely responsible for the halting of the Hassid movement? I know generalizations like this are tough to make, but it seems a man as powerful as the Vilna Gaon is capable of this feat.
It's rather strange that the top 10 hasidic population centers don't match up with the prominent jewish and general population centers of that time. Generally religous sects of that time gained support in cities, as opposed to more rustic scenes. Rural people have historically held on to their religion much closer. So why in this case is it different? -Joey Rubinstein
ReplyDeleteThe map specifies that in Lithuania, near the area of Vilna, is where the center of opposition to Hasidism arose.
ReplyDeleteVilna's leader in the mid-late 1700's, Rabbi Eliyahu ben Shlomo Zalman, commonly known as the Vilna Gaon, is known to have been a spokesman for Misnagdim, those opposed to the Hasidic movement, and thus the map's statement about the area around Vilna appears to hold some historical truth.
What could have caused this opposition to Hasidism, a movement that was spreading rapidly throughout Eastern Europe and that apparently emphasized greater piety and a closer relationship to G-D? Could the Misnagdim have feared that this was no different than the Messianic movement of Shabtai Zvi and that Europe was about to be disillusioned once again? Were they just stubborn or scared people who refused to accept other forms of religion? Did they believe that Hasidism was a drastic turn away from their Judaism? Or, perhaps, were there other concerns? Is it possible that Hasidism's emphasis on visions and miracles was deemed unnecessary or implausible by a sect of Jews who had been too hurt by similarly professed miracles from the time of Shabtai Tzvi? Or were they opposition simply for the sake of being opposition? Are there a number of factors which led to this rise of opposition (and the two people placed in cherem)?
In this map the Hassidum were almost in every country. How did they get that many people? were there more Hassidum back then then we have Jews today? and how did they get so mcuh land? were there Hassidum tyrants?
ReplyDeleteThe main "position" of the opposition to the Hassidic movement is quite a distance away from the early areas of the Hassidic groups that sprouted 1730-60. How long did it take for this opposition to develop and why? Did many people even know about Hassidim in the early 1700s? Were the Hassidic groups more secretive or were they more open when they first started?
ReplyDelete-Rose L.
the map indicates that hasidism spread much more from 1760-1775 than it did from 1730-1760. what about after 1775? did the spread of hasidism lessen and gradually stop? or did it continue to spread greatly around that are?
ReplyDelete-david reiz
i noticed that the area depicted as the center of hassidism is mostly in the Ukraine and Poland. why is it that hassidism the sect of judaism that is the most out there and exposed as being jewish came into existance in the area where historicly jews have been the most persecuted. also why is it that uman the center of one of the most prominent hassidic movements was at the far sothern edge of hassidic expansion wouldn't it have expand south from there too not just north or is it that at the time there were not many jews south of uman in the balkans because it was a primarily muslim ottoman controlled region
ReplyDeletep.s can you send me the link for mondays question the video still wont show up on my computer.
--klein--
regardless of the year the spread of hassidut into poland and austria is limited mainly to the periphery. was this a decision the hassids made on their own (to remain on the edges)or was this due to a state or socially enforced law? if it was their choice was it because they where happy where they were (i highly doubt this because of the magnitude of the spread. if this were the case the expansion wouldn't have been so great.)? or was it from fear of what lay further into the country? and if it was because of some rule enforced by some entity within the state (government or otherwise) why was this rule there? what did they have against hassids? (im leaning towards the latter because the spread into the periphery in these countries came in the second wave. if it were the hassids choice i think they would have spread there asap.)
ReplyDeletet
Back then, becoming a chassidic jew was very common and so many people felt like they needed to become a Chassidic jew. This is a big change because being a Chassidic jew is harder and has more rules then just being orthodox. Now a days being orthodox (im assuming) is more common and, being chassidic is like being a completely different type of jew and is not as common. Why do the majority of jews now feel like being orthodox is the right type of lifestyle that god wants us to live by.
ReplyDeleteWhy did people back then feel like being a chassidic jew was so much better and right? Did they actually believe that thats the lifestyle god wants us to live our lives like or is there another reason why people chose to be chassidic and not orthodox?
Were the rapidly expanding hassidim able to coexist to a certain extent with the misnagdim living in the midsts, or did two separate and contentious communities form? Likely, the truth exists somewhere in the middle. The hassic strongholds seem to be staying away from Vilna, likely due to the efforts of the Vilna Goan, but did hassidim try influencing the more traditional Jews in Vilna and elsewhere?
ReplyDeleteNathan Denicoff (not my brother Avi)
In an article I was reading (http://nassauweekly.com/articles/718/), it mentioned that the city called Lyubavichi was actually the home base for the Lubavich movement. This movement included the uprising of the Chabad system. All of this started around the year 1745. How did the Lubavich movement affect the movement as a whole? Since Chabad is still influencing people now, could the Hassidic movement still be taking place?
ReplyDelete-Aaron Zuckerman
Is there a reason why the spread of Hassidism in 1760-75 was in a much greater area of land than in 1730-60?
ReplyDelete