Time in the Teachings of Rabbi Shneur Zalman of Liadi

C
HAPTER 
2 
1. The historical dimension of Rashaz’s teachings. 
The first chapter set the conceptual framework of time in Rashaz's teachings, and 
discussed its place of origin in the sefirotic structure. The second chapter aims to 
depict the historiosophical framework underlying his thinking. Unlike the 
scholarship that has focused mostly on the synchronic aspect of Rashaz’s teachings, 
presenting them primarily as a set of concepts or beliefs that are relevant to the here 
and now
 
of the religious person, my aim in the present chapter is to present the 
diachronic dimension of Rashaz’s teachings.
Rashaz was not a historian, and one will not find in his teachings many direct 
references to current affairs or to past events. This, however, does not mean to 
suggest that he was detached from the reality of his time and place; on the contrary, 
he was a fully engaged leader to his local hasidic community, which had been 
entrusted to his care by his mentor, Menahem Mendel of Vitebsk.
1
Thus in many of 
his letters, he responds to contemporary events, such as the controversy between the 
Hasidim and their opponents, the Mitnagdim,
2
or the internal conflicts within his 
own community, e.g. over access to 
arenda
leases.
3
Moreover, Rashaz and his 
followers sided with the Russians in the war against Napoleon, and even became 
involved in espionage on their behalf.
4
His 
ma’amarim
, however, generally lack 
direct reference to these events, and when they do occasionally mention, for 
example, the gentile nations among which the Hasidim live, they clothe these 
1
See Etkes, 
Baʻal ha-Tanya
, 30-35; Loewenthal, 
Communicating
, 39-43. 
2
See for example Hillman, 
Igerot Ba’al ha-Tanya
, 105-109, 111, 231. 
3
See ibid., 74. 
4
On the espionage conducted by Habad Hasidim during Napoleon’s Russian campaign, see Etkes, 
Baʻal ha-Tanya
, 390–391 and 395. For the famous letter, in which Rashaz allegedly states that 
Napoleon’s victory would enhance the Jews’ wealth and social position but estrange them from God, 
concluding that they should support the Russians, see Heilman, 
Bet rabi
, 47a-b; Rodkinson, 
Toledot 
’amudei Habad
, 83; Hillman, 
Igerot Ba’al ha-Tanya
, 238; Levin, 
Igerot kodesh
, i, 150-1; For 
discussion of this letter, see Loewenthal, 
Communicating
, 209–10; Teitelbaum, 
Ha-rav mi-Ladi
,
 
156. 
However, Etkes (
Baʻal ha-Tanya
, 391–92 and 412–13) argues that Rashaz was not the author of the 
letter. 

---

66 
references with the biblical names of Esau or Ismael. Thus the nations are removed 
from the immediate socio-political reality of Rashaz and his followers into the sphere 
of mythical history, in which Israel conduct their perpetual struggle against their 
perennial enemies, go into the Egyptian, Babylonian and Roman exiles, and 
gradually advance toward the Promised Land. In Rashaz's teachings, as in rabbinic 
literature in general, profane history becomes part of the larger divine history that 
begins with the creation and heads towards the redemption.
5
1.1 Redemption as the purpose of creation. 
The concept of creation, which occupies a predominant position in Rashaz's 
discourses,
6
has been widely discussed in scholarship.
7
I shall therefore concentrate 
solely on the implications of Rashaz's concept of creation for his view of history. 
According to Rashaz, the creation has its purpose in the revelation of God's kingship: 
It is known to all that the purpose of the creation of the world is for the sake 
of the revelation of His kingdom, may He be blessed, for “There is no king 
without a nation.”
8
The word