Does Chassidus as it was in the days of the Gaon and the Baal Shem Tov still exist nowadays? [closed]

I was having an argument with someone that was proving Chassidus's legitimacy because the Maharal says somewhere that any group that lasts for a long time in Klal Yisroel, is the truth. Seeing as Chassidus is still around, it follows that it is a valid Mehalach and the Gaon was not right.

I told him that what we see nowadays is not Chassidus. Chassidus isn't about wearing a Beketshe and smelling snuff friday night. Its about deep Kabalah and Tzimtzum and things like that and it could be the Gaon was right.

Does anyone know where the Maharal is or if Chassidus as it was is still around?

First, let me suggest a good technique that can be used when having an argument. That is, when provided with an unusual quote, ask the person for the source. Quite often, the alleged “source”, when seen in context, doesn’t quite say what the person purported it to have said. I have found that such a technique can prevent many emotionally charged arguments, and save many hours of unproductive time. You can politely say that you’re unfamiliar with the quote, and if he cares to locate it for you, you would be happy to discuss it then.

If he insists that it says does so and how dare you suggest that it doesn’t, how can you insinuate that I’m lying etc., don’t lose your cool. Just calmly respond that sometimes people make mistakes and misquote something that they may have read many years prior. In any event, you conclude, you don’t feel that it’s productive to debate an unfamiliar point which may or not be actually as stated. Politely stick to this position, and calmly repeat yourself if necessary. Eventually the person will have to relent, and will leave you alone.

In many instances, the person won’t bother looking it up. If he does bother to look it up, he might realize that it doesn’t quite say what he thought it did. In the event that the person does locate the source, and it really does say what he alleged, you will have perhaps gained a new reference, and expanded the horizons of your knowledge. Finally, even if the reference says what the person thought that it did, it may still not be germane to the discussion at hand. In any event, the main benefit gained by postponing the discussion, is that the both parties will usually be in a less confrontational frame of mind, which will help facilitate an open minded discussion of the topic at hand.

With regard to the discussion at hand, I have not been able to locate the alleged Maharal, which the person you were debating with alleges to exist. While I can’t say with certainty that it doesn’t exist as quoted, I can certainly say that I would be highly surprised if such a quote were to be produced. The reason for my surprise would be that the Maharal is known as having a pristine Torah outlook, along with being a master of logical thought. The above statement, allegedly from the Maharal, conforms to neither of the above. It is not a correct Torah outlook, and is also logically fallacious.

The point must be forcefully made, that the argument that the survival of the test of time is an accurate reflection on the truthfulness of the group, is unfortunately incorrect, and can actually lead to horrific conclusions!

I quote from Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criteriaoftruth#Time):

“Time is a criterion commonly appealed to in debate, often referred to as “the test of time”. This criterion posits that over time erroneous beliefs and logical errors will be revealed, while if the belief is true, the mere passage of time cannot adversely affect its validity.

“Time is an inadequate test for truth... Many demonstrably false beliefs have endured for centuries and even millennia. It is commonly rejected as a valid criterion. For example, most people will not convert to another faith simply because the other religion is centuries (or even millennia) older than their current beliefs”.

A case in point is the sect of צדוק ובייתוס, which started with the disciples of Antignos of Socho, in the Second Temple era. They continued in strong force by their more commonly known name as קראים, for a period over 1,500 years, all the way at least up to the days of the Radvaz (1479-1473) [see Rambam in his commentary to Mishnah (Avos 1:3), Mishnah Torah (Mamrim 3:3); Radvaz (ad loc.)]. In their heyday, in an attempt to convince others of the righteousness of their dogma, the argument could surely have been made that they had withstood the test of time (over 1,000 years!). From a traditional Torah perspective, does this give credence to their claims of authenticity?

In a similar vein, Xian’s and Muslims make similar claims to being ancient religions which have withstood the tests of time. From a Torah perspective, does this make them true religions?

However, the person you were debating may have been thinking of the following idea which is found in the Maharal (Nesivos Olam, Nesiv Ha’emes 1, p. 196b): ...שכל אשר נמשך אחר האמת שראוי אליו הקיום, וכמו שאמרו חכמים (שבת קד א) קושטא קאי שקרא לא קאי, כי האמת ראוי אליו המציאות והשקר ראוי אליו ההעדר שלא יהיה נמצא...

Freely translated: “Anything that follows the truth deserves existence. As our Sages have said (Shabbos 104a) ‘Truth stands, falsehood doesn’t stand’. This is because truth is fitting of being reality, and falsehood is deserving of oblivion”.

While on the surface, the Maharal’s words seems to be supportive of the “test of time” theory, a closer examination of his words reveals that this is not so. Maharal was well aware that falsehood does make its debut on the world scene. He was well aware that this world is known as עלמא דשיקרא, the world of falsehood! The main question is what DESERVES to exist, and what doesn’t. To which Maharal posits, that truth DESERVES existence, while falsehood is deserving of oblivion.

In summation, falsehood may actually present itself to the world, but it will ultimately fall by the wayside, since it doesn’t have a leg to stand on. How long can falsehood make its pretensions? Sometimes this can be for thousands of years. However truth will always eventually prevail. Until that such time when the ultimate truths will be revealed to all, we must remain firm in our beliefs, and seek to serve Hashem in the very best way that we know.

I hereby pointedly ignore the conflict between the Gra and the Chassidim of his day. It is beyond the scope of this relatively brief discussion.

To respond to the question, “Does Chassidus as it was in the days of the Gaon and the Baal Shem Tov still exist nowadays?” we would need to know more about what the Baal Shem Tov’s “chassidus” actually was. This is the subject of great debate among today’s various Chassidic factions, with each claiming to be the “true” followers of the Baal Shem Tov’s traditions!

The “chassidus” promulgated in the Gra’s days, was not necessarily that of the Baal Shem Tov, who passed away in 1760, when the Gra was only 40 years old. Rather it was the the “chassidus” of the second generation Chassidim, Rabbi Yaakov Yosef of Polnoa, and the Maggid of Mezeritch with his students. The Gra’s conflict with them is documented as involving specific factual allegations on the part of the Gra. The discussion of whether the Gra was correct in his allegations, and the Chassidic response to these allegations, is beyond the scope of this discussion.

I note, however, that the problem with people getting caught up with external trappings of Torah Judaism, and ignoring the deeper requirements of being a Torah Jew, is unfortunately found today on both sides of the fence, both by Chassidim and non-Chassidim. It is far easier to satisfy one’s self with externality, such as the “black hat” or the “shtreimel”; than actually “walking the walk and talking the talk”, i.e. studying Torah, doing mitzvos, and preparing for the World to Come.

May Hashem help each of us find the correct path in Judaism; that which is singular for each of our unique spiritual composition [See Gra (Mishlei 16:4)].