PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY: A CONVERSATION (PART 1 OF 2)

Originally posted at mentalblog.com (thread: Housecleaning rules), regarding the issue of the tragic incident involving a Lubavitcher bochur beating the Rebbe’s elderly sister-in-law:

I vividly remember Rashag standing on the bima in 770 on the Monday after the beating calling her name out for a mishebeirach. I was horrified and disgusted by that beating and never-ever encountered anyone here who felt differently. I therefore took great offence at Schneur's audacious call to the general Lubavitch population for a 'cheshbon nefesh' for that event.
Now, if you or Schneur know something about specific people being somehow responsible, then address those specific people by their names. Or are we now officially in age of ‘collective responsibility’?
berl, crown heights 10.16.05 - 2:51 pm #

People often call a group to an account even though individual members of the group always have their own unique opinions. The fact is that Lubavitch never done the followings:
1. Publicized and internalized the full horror of what happened.
2. Did chebon nefesh about the atmosphere of hysteria that lead to the event. Let’s not open the case of the two officers of the Rebbe who are widely perceived to have contributed to the hysteria, some say even mislead the Rebbe in this regard.
3. Did some seder of atonement as a group for the crime that was committed against the Rayatz’s daughter.
4. Held the perpetrator accountable instead of arranging his quick escape by the officer of the organization.
Tzemach Atlas Homepage 10.16.05 - 3:42 pm #

“People often” do wrong things, that is not a good enough reason [for you] to do something, is it? You can only “call to account” those that did something wrong and no one else. Period.
berl, crown heights 10.16.05 - 7:42 pm #

What do [you] feel I have to 'atone' for in this regard?
It is easy to call on faceless 'group' to do something. It’s a whole other story when you are forced to realize that you are talking about many 'berls' who did nothing wrong in this case in machshovoh, dibbur umaaseh.
berl, crown heights 10.16.05 - 8:24 pm #

You certainly accept the fact the movement does have a face when you speak about
the good of Lubavitch.
Tzemach Atlas Homepage 10.16.05 - 9:08 pm #

I strenuously object to your impression that I feel entitled to “take credit for the good of my group even though I personally had nothing to do with it”. I might be happy and proud for things Lubavitch has done, but I absolutely feel that 100% of the credit goes to the doers and no one else. I am conversely not at all prepared to take any blame for someone else’s wrongdoings. This is the key pointing this particular argument. This is not an attempt to defend anyone who is guilty, but a demand that an accusing finger be pointed strictly at those individuals.
berl, crown heights 10.16.05 - 9:15 pm #

Inside my head I really do not think of a movement with “a face.”
I think of “Lubavitch” as derech hoaveidoh or the Rebbeim and teiras hachassidus. And then there are individual Chassidim, the people.
berl, crown heights 10.16.05 - 9:20 pm #

Berl, when Ron[ald] Reagan said that Russia was an "evil empire", he certainly did not refer to many of the good people in Russia. But the statement was perfectly true. When Schneur or I said that it was an evil moment for Lubavitch why do YOU get insulted? Can you accept the fact the movement has a face that is not your own?
Tzemach Atlas Homepage 10.16.05 - 8:45 pm #

"People are part of Lubavitch of their own free volition." This is a naive approach to the realities and dynamics of any large movement.

You remind me of the types I encountered in Russia many times, the ideologues of communism who believed that Lenin was well intentioned, theory of communism perfect if only allowed to be executed as it was intended. They ideas of communism were true if not for the “individuals” who messed it up.
So you know when a President wins with 51% of the vote they call it a landslide. You can gage this (beating) issue by polling the average Lubavitchers about what do they know and what do they think. The result is not in doubt; hence the accusatory finger at the movement is not misplaced, because this result is indicative of the lack of cheshbon nephesh on the part of the movement that trickled down to the majority of it’s members. As they are manipulated within the totalitarian group without basic glasnost. In the end it is all about glasnost.
Tzemach Atlas Homepage 10.16.05 - 9:35 pm #

The ideologues of communism who believed that Lenin was well intentioned, theory of communism perfect if only allowed to be executed as it was intended.

Mimmoh nafshoch:

1. if it is the belief in anything being "perfect" that is always problematic, then you can't accept such an attitude toward anything at all, including the ten commandments, Moses, and G-d Himself.
2. if, however, you can accept such an attitude as sometimes legitimate, then comparing every such case with die-hard communists because of this similarity simply does not wash.

As to “lubavitch”, I have seen the real thing, I have seen men who were giants of spirit. Because of that I know "it works", not because of any theory, supposition, or hope. At the end, we are not even talking about the same thing when we say “lubavitch”.
berl, crown heights 10.16.05 - 11:55 pm #