Talk:Nachman of Breslov

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Judaism (Rated B-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Judaism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Judaism-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Religion (Rated B-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Wikipedia's articles on Religion-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Biography (Rated B-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 

Inaccuracy and corrections[edit]

Rooster613 07:01, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)There is a gross inaccuracy in this article, which I shall correct after writing these notes here. Rebbe Nachman did not believe that "there is only one Tzaddik" in every generation. This would contradict his claim that every person could achieve the same level as he did, i.e. become a Tzaddik. Nathan of Nemirov wrote in Rabbi Nachman's Wisdom: "The Rebbe (i.e., Nachman) spoke out very strongly against those who thought that the main reason for a Tzaddik's great attainments was the high level of his soul. He insisted that this was not true, maintaining that it depends completely on good deeds (mitzvot)and effort. He was very specific in emphasizing this. He said, 'Every person can attain the highest level. It depends on nothing but your own free choice... For everything depends upon a multitude of deeds.'" (Rabbi Nachman's Wisdom, lesson #26, on page 29 of the Kaplan English edition.)

What Nachman did believe is that he was the Tzaddik Ha-Dor ("Tzaddik of the generation.") This is the teaching (shared by others besides Breslov) that in every generation there is a certain Tzaddik who could become the Messiah if conditions are right. Otherwise, he lives and dies like any other holy man. Whether or not Nachman thought he was the Messiah is debated. Some are of the opinion that he made this claim in secret writings that he later ordered to be burned when he realized he was not the Messiah. We do know that the Burned Books actually existed, and that his disciples obeyed orders and burned them, but we do not know what they contained. We also know that Reb Nachman said, "My light will burn until the coming of the Messiah," which would be a strange thing to say if he thought he was the Messiah. Breslover Hasidim today do not believe he was the Messiah, but they do believe his light continues to shine through his teachings.

Please sign your posts at the end, not the beginning.
You cannot expect a page written by others, especially those uninitiated in Reb Nachman's philosophy, to conform to your view. Please make edits and see. JFW | T@lk 08:20, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Sorry about the signing in the wrong place -- I misread the directions for where to put the tildes. And Of course I don't expect everyone to conform to my view, but since I actually am a practicing Breslover Hasid, and I've never heard any Breslover say that Rebbe Nachman was the Messiah, I would at least like the more common Breslov view up there. Go to any official Breslov site -- you will not find any claims that he was the Messiah. If others disagree and re-edit or add other views, so be it. But the sources that the previous writer cited are from the Encyclopedia Judaica (some of which I left there, BTW, although i re-arranged the papragraphs to make the whole thing read more smoothly). The E-Judaica article was written decades ago when academe had a rather anti-Hasidic bias, IMHO. I, on the other hand, am citing actual Breslov sources. Rooster613 10:19, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Rabbi Nachman said explicitly (Chayay Moharan 274) that the Mushiach will come from his progenity. That should put an end to this whole question.Na Nach Nachmu Nachmun (talk) 09:48, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

"Official" Breslov sites[edit]

Regarding "official sites" -- as stated on the Breslov page, there is no single leader of Breslov and therefore, no single official site. I agree that a distinction should be made between Breslov org sites and useful links to various private pages, but no single site can be THE official one. The "Breslov on the Internet" site is maintained by a Hasid from the Rabbi Odesser group. The "Judaism with Heart" site is the site of the Breslov Research Institute, led by Rabbi Chaim Kramer. I marked BOTH as official sites because both are. This seems the best way to resolve the issue. The portal breslov.com has links to a rango of Breslov organisations, from the World council to Rav Odesser pagesRooster613 13:38, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Please verify that the "Breslov on the Internet" site is maintained by who you said, because I just visited the site and it definitely did not do him justice. This means that Rabbi Israel Dov Odessers group has no representation! Being that according to all sources Rabbi Israel Dov Odesser was a master of the tradition of Breslov, while some say he (G-d forbid) went mad others maintain his well being to the very end and maintain that he was THE master of the tradition. Many may claim that he is radical, however this is in itself evidence to the decisiveness of his tradition that should not be ignored (G-d forbid) and definitely should be mentioned and examined!Na Nach Nachmu Nachmun (talk) 14:38, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
Well, it was maintained by a NaNacher back in 2005 when I wrote the above comment but of course, webmasters do change. Could be the current one is not the same person who founded the site. Rooster613 (talk) 08:03, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

As I stated, there is no single offical Breslov page!!! "Breslov on the Internet" does not claim to be THE official page, it is simply a hub with a lot of useful links. It does Rebbe Nachman "justice" but is probably maintained by a person who does not accept the later 20th-century teachings of Reb Odesser. As is explained in the Na Nach Nachma article that I helped create (and which is linked here, you will note), there is a lot of controversy surrounding Rabbi Yisroel Ber Odesser who also has a page on Wikipedia. Clearly the intent is not to exclude Na Nachers but, since this is the Nachman of Breslov page, not the Reb Odesser page, the focus here is on Rebbe Nachman himself. Rooster613 (talk) 21:05, 18 December 2008 (UTC)rooster613

Dear Rooster613: your integrity is appreciated, but please be aware that the link to the Nanach is only there because of people like me that keep putting it back up, something should be done to make the link to Rabbi Israel Dov Odesser and to Nanach permanent. Why the references of this page are to biased English transalations will be another issue to contend to, but I can't see any reason why mention of the purest and strongest tradition of Rabbi Nachman should not be permanently affixed to his entry.Na Nach Nachmu Nachmun (talk) 16:47, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Na Nach Nachmu Nachmun, I have been to your site, nanach.net, and what do I find on the homepage? An extremely nasty, petty and bikkering bunch of insults against those of us who are longtime editors here on Wikipedia. Especially insulting to me since I CREATED the Na Nach Nachma page (so you can hardly call me "biased" against the mantra) and I also did a great deal to improve the Yisroel Ber Odesser page -- if you would bother to look at the history of both these pages, you would see that is true. As for your self-promoting of your own website, it is hardly the "purest and strongest tradition of Rebbe Nachman" (your words) when its homepage attacks other Breslovers. Rabbenu urged us to love one another, not start wars over who is the best or who has the most followers. Rooster613 (talk) 10:17, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

Can you please tell me what insults you saw there? What I see is just that we found some mistakes and most important that you omitted the most well known name of Rabbi Nachman. You are probably refering to one of the comments that mentions that there exist some editors on the wiki that are 'lifeless' and that they delete alot of rectifications. This is a very unfortunate problem that we are still contending with, so don't be insulted, just keep providing good work and don't be of those that destroy, be of those that build and enhance.

The fact that you started the Na Nach Nachma page is very nice, however, forgive me for saying this, you insult at the very same time. E.g. you brand Na Nach as a mantra, even here as we debate this issue, even though your intentions are good but still it is very demeaning. There was and still is a very important need to have a page about Na Nach, you tried to fill this vacancy, but you are obviously not sufficiently familiar with the topic. This is not a question of POV, it is a question of properly providing and documenting - with sources - the subject matter. Please be in touch with me to discuss restarting the Na Nach page from scratch, or doing a complete over haul.

As for your contention to the fact that Na Nach is based on the strongest tradition of Breslov, by bringing up how the Nanach claim that the other so called Breslovers are not proper representation of the True Breslov, know that this is what True Breslov is about, doing, proclaiming, and making known the true way of God and Rabbainu. Breslovers were never intimidated by controversy and conflict, they stuck to the truth. In my personal experience it is usually people who are promoting corrupt values that hide behind the arguement of "ahavas chinum" - love and brotherlyness (as you can see with c. and the pundriks).Na Nach Nachmu Nachmun (talk) 10:36, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Also, nanach.net appears to be primarily a blog site. No offense, but blogs are not generally considered verifiable sources because anybody can write anything on them. Rooster613 (talk) 10:28, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

nanach.net is primarily a blog, but is also the mother of an info site that offers many of Rabbi Nachman's books for free download, including "The Life of Rabbi Nachman". Can there be anything more directly pertanent? nanach.net also is no different than the discussions board here, anything that is printed there can be contended with in the comments.Na Nach Nachmu Nachmun (talk) 10:36, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

As for why English translations are used here, this is the ENGLISH LANGUAGE version of Wikipedia. So it makes sense to cite English translations. And I do not find these translations to be "biased" at all.

obviously the citations are going to be to English translations, but there is a great need that the person posting them be familiar with the original language because many times, and almost always when regarding controvertial issues, the translation will not be accurate.Na Nach Nachmu Nachmun (talk) 10:36, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

As for why we do not link to nanach.net on this page, I have already explained that this page is about Rebbe Nachman himself.  You will note that there is a link to the Na Nach Nachma page here and has been for some time, so your accusations of "bias" are unfounded.  The real problem seems to be that you have no sense of academic discipline and do not understand what NPOV means in an encyclopedia. Rooster613 (talk) 07:40, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your understanding and cooperation! Great blessings of Na Nach Nachmu Nachman MiUman!Na Nach Nachmu Nachmun (talk) 10:36, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

More on English translations[edit]

The Wikipedia verifiability policy page clearly states:

"Because this is the English Wikipedia, for the convenience of our readers, editors should use English-language sources in preference to sources in other languages, assuming the availability of an English-language source of equal quality, so that readers can easily verify that the source material has been used correctly. Where editors translate any direct quote, they should quote the relevant portion of the original, non-English text in a footnote or in the article. Translations published by reliable sources are preferred over translations made by Wikipedia editors."

Since there are English translations of Rebbe Nachman's works available, it makes sense to use them instead of doing our own translations here. Rooster613 (talk) 10:17, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

The problem is that they are often unreliable, and almost never of "equal quality".Na Nach Nachmu Nachmun (talk) 10:55, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Book by Green[edit]

A worthwhile book to read is "The Tortured Master" by Arthur Green, it discusses at great length the formation and evolution of Rav Nachman's views and beliefs as well as the concept of Tzadik Hador. In reading that above passage from "Rav Nachmans Wisdom" and also learning the concept of Tzadik Hador one could get the impression that there two contradictory teachings but in fact there not. In Rav Nachmans understanding even in a world filled with Righteous jews there would still be the need for that ONE soul who posesses a little more than the rest, as evidenced with Israel in the wilderness the sages comment that this generation was on the highest of levels, enough to recieve the Torah but we still had Moses as our leader who was a step above from the rest (also see Korach's rebellion (Bamidbar:Korach) . Rav Nachman claims everyone could reach his level, but the main word being "could", Rav Nachmans conception (obviously Rav Nachman is not the only one to teach this concept) of the Tzadik Hador was the person who could and DID reach this level, meaning he overcame all his temptations and changed his attributes, which would puts him in a diffrent class. Its as if there was one throne and many princes who were quite capable of leading but one prince triumphed for the throne, the other princes lacked that drive that the one prince had possesed to occupy the throne and become king. So we all have the tools to merit being the Tzadik Hador but something intrinsic within us stops us from being this Tzadik Hador. Also Rav Nachman teaches the concept that the Tzadik Hador has the soul of Moses and the Messiah so there it would seem that in every generation there is ONE soul to go around which prevents us from being that Tzadik Hador, but we might still posses those tools to perfect ourselves and to be Righteous rather than the MOST righteous. One could also postulize that Rav Nachman said this quote before he had realized he was the Tzadik Hador, and just envisioned himself as a righteous person. Personally i dont know when he said this quote so i could be wrong. But i suggest to pick up the book Nafi

I have read Green's book and it is a very good history, but one must keep in mind that he is an academic scholar, not a practicing Breslover, although he does hold a deep respect for Rebbe Nachman. (I met Dr. Green when I lived in Philadelphia many years ago.) But among other things, also remember that he was once the President of the Reconstructionist seminary, and before that he was part of the Conservative movement. He has never claimed to be a Breslover. So I stand by my statement earlier, that I have never heard any Breslovers claim that Rebbe Nachman was the Messiah. As for the Zaddik HaDor having the soul of the Messiah, this idea is not original to Breslov. There is a much older teaching about a secret lamedvavnik (hidden saint) who, in every generation, could potentiallybe the Messiah if the people are ready for him to come. Otherwise, the lamedvavnik remains simply a very righteous person -- and even he does not know his own potential as the Messiah until the moment actually arrives.User:rooster613

Just finished reading "Tormented Soul" which I greatly enjoyed, but was amazed at his disrespect for Rabbi Nachman discussing him as one would discuss a dog or a rabbit! It's been about 40 years now since he wrote the book, in which he lay down which such confidence the makings of Rabbi Nachman, the same amount of the entire life of Rabbi Nachman, so I would really like to see what the author can say for himself now. The book offers a very fine exposition of the timetable of what was going in Breslov, most of which the author himself says was done by a different scholar, but even still he deserves considerable credit (besides the fact that the other works were not as available). There are many points which the author shows his mastery and proper research. However it is quite amazing, once again at many completely false and untenable statements that the author makes. For example, Green says that the 20th Tora in Liqutay Moharan is the only one that is based on a story Rabbi Nachman revealed that he had dreamed. Besides for the fact that that exact reference quotes Rabbi Nachman as saying that each of his Tora's have a story, Rabbi Nussun writes explicitly about another Tora (if I recall correctly the first of Liquaty Moharan 2) was based on a story Rabbi Nachman had dreamed (in which they had brought him a chair, and all the marriages....). Unfortunately I didn't record all of the out right false statements, but if anyone should need them, let me know. Green does provide much stimulating thought, but the abc of Rabbi Nachman is that only one who practices the teachings can have any claim to understanding them, and here Green just doesn't come through. For example, he beautifuly builds from Rabbi Nachman's teachings what appears to be a dichotomy of position whether one should retain complete simplicity and avoid all theoretical and philosophical question, when Rabbi Nachman professes that as a person advances he is presented with new prediciments of this sort which must be overcome. Had Green fully accepted Rabbi Nachman's position, he would have tested them in practice, and he would have had the strength and conviction to retain the stance of simplicity and leave all of his doubts and delusions, true he would be presented with new and stronger ones, but he would find solace in the simplicity of faith and in the strength of Rabbi Nachman to forge past them. Also absurd is the way Green determines that (G-d forbid) Rabbi Nachman had issues with women, based on the fact that Rabbi Nachman frequently stresses the importance of traditional purity! He offers the same conclusion from the tales Rabbi Nachman told, claiming that there are traces of tyrany in the women because Rabbi Nachman had issues?!!! Green suggests that the migilas storim names Rabbi Nachman as the Mushiach, today parts of the migilas starim have been published, and Green suggestion has been proven wrong. Green does learn many valid and good points and arguements from Rabbi Nachman, and often even when he is obviously wrong - such as when he provides reasoning to something Rabbi Nachman clearly stated no one would have figured out - Green is still interesting and stimulating.Na Nach Nachmu Nachmun (talk) 15:28, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

It is very note worthy that Arthur Green, to his enormous credit, has a son who can be classified as a Nanach! This is a definite sign that he has had good intentions!Na Nach Nachmu Nachmun (talk) 11:11, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Arthur Green certainly does not discuss Rebbe Nachman as if he were "a dog or a rabbit" as you say -- but he does discuss history in a modern academic style, not in yeshivish. Again, Na Nach Nachmu Nachum, you seem to have a problem dealing with academic and NPOV styles of writing. Just because a person does not write from a soapbox it does not mean they have no respect. Regarding "problems with women" it could be argued (and has been by feminism) that most writings of that era were somewhat negative toward women. This may sound disrespectful in 21st century, but in the 1800s there were Rebbes who, saintly as they might be, still had negative attitudes towards women. From an academic POV, this is a legitimate area to explore. Rooster613 (talk) 08:16, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

Dear Rooster613, it has been some time since I've read the book. This much is clear, when Rabbi Nachman says explicitly that no one can know what his intentions were (of his trips) and a scholar presents a cocky theory as the probable reason, that is very disrespectful. Also subjecting someone like Rabbi Nachman to infantile physchological deficiencies is also very disrespectful of the subject.

A.G.'s attempt to smear Rabbi Nachman on the woman issues was unfortunately more than what you suggest.

BTW about my academic standards, this Nanach is a college dropout (after 2.5 years in which my average only dipped to 3.97) and has authored and published books on the Talmud and other subjects.Na Nach Nachmu Nachmun (talk) 11:11, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Zaddik HaDor[edit]

BTW, regarding "Zaddik HaDor having the soul of the Messiah" the idea is also in Chabad see the Sicha said on Simchas Torah 5746. --PinchasC | £€åV€ m€ å m€§§åg€ 02:24, 25 July 2005 (UTC)

Regarding Rebbe Nachman's claim that everyone could achieve the same level as he, I think he meant what he said. Of course there could be only one Zaddik HaDor at any given time, and technically that would be a little higher than any other righteous person, but I don't think this was his main point. I think he meant to counteract the idea, held by some other Hasidic groups, that a Rebbe is born a Rebbe, something like a Hindu avatar who is a perfect saint from birth, and that this is a level nobody but a born Rebbe can reach. Others thought he had inherited his righteousness because he was the great-grandson of the Baal Shem Tov. Rebbe Nachman was stressing that everything depends on our own deeds, not our yichus (family background) or station at birth. User:rooster613

This is a topic that needs to be properly adressed, with the help of God, the Nanach will attend to this.Na Nach Nachmu Nachmun (talk) 11:14, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Na Nach Nachma Nachman Me'uman[edit]

Can anyone talk about the significance of this popular phrase? or is that beyond the scope of Nachman himself? SF2K1

I have it on my "To do" list to create a page on this, hopefully soon. It should be more properly discussed (or linked to) on the Breslov page, rather than Rabbi Nachman of Breslov. Although it is based on his name, he himself did not use it, and it was not known until the early 20th century. It is really a kabbalistic mantra used by the followers of the late Rabbi Yisroel Ber Odesser and does not date to Nachman himself. It is not universally used by all Breslovers, either. Rabbi Odesser's followers are a sub-group within the Breslov movement. Rooster613

The mantra of Na Nach Nachma Nachman Me'uman was what some people thought to be a joke on Rav Odesser by some of his yeshiva students at the end of his life where he was unfortunately very senile, the students put a handwritten letter claiming it was heaven and that the author of the letter was Rav Nachman trying to communicate with Rav Odesser and within the letter it mentions this mantra as a segulah (charm) for the Mashiach, sadly in israel there is now a division within Breslov of Na Nachers and Breslovers, those who believe in the "letter from heaven" and those who are against it. It could be worth mentioning since its a well known symbol nowadays in Breslov and is seemingly spray painted everywhere in Israel. Nafi

Actually, the document with the mantra was NOT found at the "end of his life when he was senile," it found in 1922, when he was 17 years old, and was his mantra for all the years of his life. However, it did not become popularized in Israel until the millennium fervor before the year 2000, when everybody and anybody on the planet was digging messianic prophecies. See the Na Nach Nachma page I created recently, for the story of "the letter from heaven," based on an account by Rav Odesser himself. I myself do not use this mantra, I use "Ribbono shel Olam" which was Rebbe Nachman's mantra. But others do use it, and it is a controversy was to whether it is authentic or not. Some Breslovers believe it is the words of Rebbe Nachman, some do not. For this reason, I included a section on controversies on the page. BTW, It is not Wiki NPOV to call something "a sick practical joke." Only SOME people CLAIM it was a practical joke. Others believe it was a miracle. User: rooster613

In a different talk page i recognized my error, but i did find another site which says he was 34 and not 17, but again i was wrong about him being in his old age. if anyone has been to the old city in the rova theres a guy called the 'n na nach guy" who all he says is this mantra.Nafi

My source for Reb Odesser being 17 years old is a booklet called "The Letter from Heaven" which has a firsthand account written by Reb Odesser himself. (I this bok as a ref. on the Na Nach Nachma page.) He opens the account with "In the year 5682 (1922) on the Seventeenth of Tammuz, I felt terrible weakness..." (p. 17) He goes on to describe how he broke the fast, felt depressed, found the letter, etc. Since this is his own account of what happened, I think we have to accept that he was 17 and not 34 or elderly as his detractors claim. (There seems to be a discrepancy about his birth date -- some sources say 1905, which would fit with the 1922 date above. Others say 1888, which makes him 34. A mystery unsolved as yet.)

Whether or not it was a "joke" depends on whose opinion you listen to. The jury is out on this with me, although I lean toward the opinion that the note was something written by Rebbe Nachman years ago, when he visited Tiberias, as we know he did on his pilgrimage. Perhaps he slipped it into an old book to be found in the future -- as a sort of time capsule? Stranger things have happened. But if it was a forgery, then I wonder about the following points:

  • How did the jokester know Reb Odesser had broken the fast that day? According to his own account, he broke the fast in the morning before walking to the mikveh and then to the yeshiva where he found the note. Even if he did say something about breaking the fast, when would the jokester have had time to write the note and put it in his room?
  • How did the jokester put into his head "a powerful thought... as though someone had entered my head and my mind" (Odesser's words) telling him to go to his room? If it was someone playing a joke by telling him to go to his room, why did he experience it as being in his mind?
  • How was Reb Odesser guided to EXACTLY the right book to find it? In his account, he describes walking to the bookshelf and taking a "certain book" down "as the thought had said to me." He did not thumb through multiple books before finding it accidentally, as would be the case if someone wrote it and hid it in one of his books for him to randomly find. Also, he claimed the bookcase was locked and he had the only key. So how did the jokester get in?
  • If it was written by a fellow student, then he must have been intimately familiar with Rebbe Nachman's writings, as well as kabbalah, to come up with this idea. Since most of the people at the shul where Reb Odesser davened at the time were anti-Breslov, why would they have "wasted" their time reading the details of Rabeynu's writings to find such an obscure ref to a four-fold song of redemption?

Frankly, I fail to see how this defames Reb Odesser when he himself told the story and taught the mantra? I am not in favor of the graffiti artists who spray it all over the place, but that is a different issue. Rebbe Nachman himself said there is holiness in reciting the names of Zadikkim. So what is wrong with those who choose to use this mantra, regardless of the origin? user:rooster613

Rabbi Israel Dov Odesser was 17 when he first found out about Breslov and began to practice its ways. He then met the hidden tzadik Rabbi Israel Karduner, who was The Master of the Tradition of Rabbi Nachman. Rabbi Israel Dov Odesser served G-d with his mentor for about 5 years, during which he got married and had children. The story of the Holy Petek occured in 1922 some years after the passing of Rabbi Israel Karduner. There is some controversy as to the exact age of Rabbi Israel Dov Odesser, the most popular belief is that he lived to the age of 106 (if I recall correctly (according to all accounts) he died in 1994) many experts however claim that he was almost 10 years younger.Na Nach Nachmu Nachmun (talk) 15:43, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Not all Breslovers are Haredim[edit]

Regarding the statement in the Sabbetean section that Breslov is considered part of Haredi Judaism: In Israel and Brooklyn that is mostly true. However, in other areas where there are fewer Jews, Breslovers can be found in Modern Orthodox synagogues. There are also Breslovers among the "Shlomo people" who, although they are Orthodox, are not Haredi. Some Breslovers (myself included) feel that Rebbe Nachman's instructions to follow "Whatever is in the Shulchan Arukh" does not necessarily require a Haredi lifestyle. However, it does imply that one should be Orthodox.Rooster613

Dov Shurun's son is Nanach and hates Haredim (to be precise, he loves all jews, but not how they present themselves as Haredim), he believes that no Breslover is Haredi!15:56, 18 December 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Na Nach Nachmu Nachmun (talkcontribs)
"Hating" Haredim is not really in the spirit of Breslov, IMHO. Rabbbenu had all types at his table, from very frum to secular -- and he loved them all. And as you will note above, I have noted that not all Breslovers are Haredim. However, the core of Breslov is Orthodox, even if there are non-Orthodox people who embrace some aspects of the Rebbe's teachings. Rooster613 (talk) 07:45, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

Dear Rooster613 please pay attention and importance to what was written in the brackets!Na Nach Nachmu Nachmun (talk) 11:18, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Rename the page as "Nachman of Breslov"??[edit]

Shouldn't this page be re-named "Nachman of Breslov", since "Breslov" is the more common spelling? I think the "Breslav" spelling is a carryover form when this page was an excerpt from the old Encyclopedia Judaica. I am reluctant to make the change myself because I don't know how to do disambiguations yet, and I don't want to screw up other links. Still, it sohuld be "Breslov," I think... User:Rooster613

"Breslov" gets 34,000 google hits while "Breslav" only gets 11,000. --PinchasC | £€åV€ m€ å m€§§åg€ 02:22, 27 July 2005 (UTC)
Also Breslov (Hasidic dynasty) is spelles with an "o"

Yes, I know that Breslov (Hasidic dynasty) is spelled with a O, but since this page is about the Rebbe of Breslov, shouldn't it also be spelled with an O for consistency, instead of with a A? Since "Breslov" gets over 3 times as many hits as "Breslav" it seems the page title should use the more commonly-accepted O spelling, nu? Also, BTW, there is a group in Israel that transliterates it as "Breslev" with an E in their pubs -- if that spelling is not already in the redirect, it should be added. Or are we leaving "Breslav" so those 11,000 Google searchers who use that spelling can find it? User:Rooster613

Wikipedia:Redirect. JFW | T@lk 22:44, 27 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Done. Page now uses "Breslov" name. IZAK 05:00, 25 August 2005 (UTC)
OK, I may be stirring up a can of worms - but it is NOT Breslov but Bratslav. If Rabbi Nachman of Bratslav is the choice of Encyclopedia Judaica, certainly a respectable enough source, then it should be Bratslav. In fact, there is no entry at all for a place called Breslov.--Gilabrand 15:43, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
Indeed it is Bratslav. But they have decided to call themselves Breslov (don't ask why) and that is now the common usage. --Redaktor 22:42, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

One of the most popular reasons given for why the proper name is Breslov (or Bresluv, or Breslev) is based upon what Rabbi Nachman of Breslov once said that in the future everyone would be breslover chasidim, because it says in scriptures that G-d will take out their hearts of stone and replace them with hearts of flesh 'Lev Bussar', (in hebrew the 'ss' is a ש, the medrash interprets this further replacing the ש with a ס) the hebrew letters of Lev Bussar can be realigned to form Breslov! (This reason is also supplied in "Tormenten Masters"). (Personally I think that Bratslav is a little demeaning).Na Nach Nachmu Nachmun (talk) 16:03, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

"Bratzlav" is the spelling most commonly used by Martin Buber and other secular academics. I have never seen or heard it used by actual Breslovers. The variant spellings of Breslav, Breslev, Bresluv, etc. use slightly different vowel pronunciations but all agree on the consonants and in Hebrew use a Samech (S) and not a Tzaddi (TZ). I think there should be a re-direct from Bratzlav to this page but I support the idea that a group has the right to definitively name itself and not be named by outsiders. Also, FYI, the name Breslov is a play on the Ashkenazi or Yiddish "Bris lev" meaning "circumcision of the heart." Rooster613 (talk) 21:34, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Nachman of Breslov on wife and husband relations[edit]

Article needs more information about Breslov views related with sexual questions. Here are only mentioned danger of masturbation.

What sexual questions do you have? As Breslov is part of mainstream Orthodox Judaism, its Hasidim subscribe to all the laws about sexuality in the Shulchan Aruch, including: no premarital sex, sex only within marriage, no adultery, etc. Rebbe Nachman only highlighted some specific sexual aberrations—which are also sins—that damage a person's soul. If that is not clear in the article, I could change that. Yoninah 14:06, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
Surely he had some original thoughts or writings on the topic of sexuality? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.126.95.2 (talk) 04:54, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
His main emphasis was on shemirat habrit (guarding the covenant), referring to the brit milah (covenant of circumcision). This ties into the list above: no premarital sex, sex only within marriage, no adultery, etc. This is already in the article. Yoninah (talk) 09:20, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

Didn't he author a bunch of parables/fairy tales?[edit]

You should add some discussion of them in the article.

Look under sub-section: "Published works." The 13 parables and fragments of stories were published as "Sippurei Maasiyot" ("Rabbi Nachman's Stories"). Although these stories have deep and significant meaning, they are not the backbone of Rebbe Nachman's teachings, so the article details his major teachings in greater depth. Perhaps you would like to see a separate Wikipedia article on the "Sippurei Maasiyot"? Yoninah 21:33, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
That's a great idea, the stories have gained universal world wide recognition and deserve a page of their ownNa Nach Nachmu Nachmun (talk) 16:53, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
I agree. There is already a page on The Rooster Prince which I created a while back in connection with folklore related to chickens. Perhaps there should be a page on each story, with a general page about Rebbe Nachman's tales and links to all the stories? This would be consistent with other pages on various folktales. It would also be a major project that will take some time to develop. Rooster613 (talk) 07:58, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

Breslov vs. Bratslav[edit]

The town is actually known as Bratslav, so Rebbe Nachman of Bratslav is correct English name. Despite the fact that for historical reasons the Hasidic movement is called Breslov, in local Ukrainian Yiddish this town is called Broslev (in literature - Braslav). So the name of the movement and the name of the town, where reb Nakhman lived, sound differently.


This was previously discussed and developed, no wonder this entry didn't sign his name.Na Nach Nachmu Nachmun (talk) 16:07, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

As I noted above, the name Breslov taken by Rebbe Nachman himself for his Hasidim and is based on Yiddish pronunciation. The question here is not about secular geography but rather, what does this group call itself. There are NO sites run by Breslover Hasidim that call themselves "Bratzlav." Rooster613 (talk) 21:30, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Kol Haolam Kulo[edit]

So I'm no Bratslaver, but I'm fond of the song Kol Haolam Kulo, and if the text of the Hebrew song is an accurate reflection of Rebbe Nachman's proverb, then the article's translation should be changed--as it is, it's not really close to the literal meaning. A literal translation of "Kol Haolam Kulo Gesher Tzar Meod / V'haikar Lo L'fached Ra'" would be "The whole world is a very narrow bridge, and the main thing is not to fear evil." Obviously everyone will translate the Hebrew in his or her own way, but the current translation is more of an interpretation than a translation, and should be revised.

-- the words are "Lo L'fached CLAL," don't fear AT ALL, not "Lo L'fached Ra." 138.88.156.103 22:34, 7 June 2007 (UTC)Shimshi

Added paragraph to section on controversies[edit]

To indicate greater context of controversy in his time. Mitnagdim versus hasidim. Jews of Haskalah versus Hasidim. --Metzenberg 12:44, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
Don't forget Jews of Haskalah versus Mitnagdim. Phil_burnstein (talk) 05:34, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

哈西德拉比布列斯洛夫的教导[edit]

看这个世界

像那独木桥

孤单路一条

寂寞路一条


年轻的人啊

你只往前走

直去莫回头

...

只要心中不忘

不忘念念不遗忘 (不忘念念不啊不遗忘)

无惧勇往直前

勇往直向前


无惧勇往直前

勇往直前直向前 (勇往直前直啊直向前)

不忘念念不忘

向前直向前

http://www.aish.com/shabbatsongs/shabbatsongsdefault/-Kol_Haolam_Kulo-_-_Jewish_Courage.asp http://www.greatjewishmusic.com/Midifiles/Kol%20HaOlam.htm


Kol Ha'olam kulo

Gesher Tsar me'od

Gesher Tsar me'od

Gesher Tsar me'od -


Kol Ha'olam kulo

Gesher Tsar me'od -

Gesher Tsar me'od.


Veha'ikar - veha'ikar

Lo lefached -

lo lefached klal.

Veha'ikar - veha'ikar

lo lefached klal.

I take issue with several points in "His Teachings"[edit]

1. Confiding in another human being.

According to Jewish law it is forbidden to reveal one's sins to others unless it is necessary for forgiveness, for example if someone embarrassed someone in public, he must apologise in public, but he is forbidden to tell the public of sins he committed. King David says in Psalms, fortunate is the one who hides his sins! The Talmud does encourage to confide in another one's worries - not sins. Jewish law demands that we admit our sins to G-d. Rabbi Nachman teaches that the sins a person committs are engraved in his bones, and that even after a person fully repents and has been forgiven for the sins, they still remain imprinted on the persons bones. By admitting the sins to a true Tzadik he extrapulates the lettering of the sins from the bones. That is the purpose, it may have implications and meaning to pyschology, but please do not denegrate the stated function and purpose.

When Rabbi Israel Dov Odesser, fondly known as the Saba - the last loyal and full successor of the tradition of Rabbi Nachman - first met his mentor Rabbi Israel Karduner, the Saba realizing that he was with a True Tzadik wanted to do a confession, Rabbi Israel Karduner said that he could only do a general confession and he should not state specificly the wrong doings. There are however versions of the story that say that after the Saba insisted, Rabbi Israel Karduner aquiested and allowed the Saba to do a complete confession before him.

Here you go again with the insults -- can you substantiate that Reb Odesser was "the last loyal and full successor" or the tradition -- or is it your BELIEF that he was? Especialy since Rebbe Nachman was AGAINST establishing a successorship? He never appointed a successor, and Reb Nosson neverclaimed to be such. Reb Odesser was a loyal follower, true. And some such as yourself consider him their Rebbe. But it is insulting to the rest of Breslov teachers to say he is the only true, loyal teacher. Rooster613 (talk) 09:14, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

This is beyond the scope of this page, but if you can read Hebrew I can provide you with the proof I have written to this. Go to nanach.org and download "Likutay Nanach" and I will direct you to the desired chapter.

BTW The Saba in not the Rebbe, he is, as Rabbi Nachman calls him in the Petek, a precious student of Rabbi Nachman, upon whom Rabbi Nachman was referring when he said, "my fire will burn until the coming of Mushiach", this itself almost completely answers your other question.Na Nach Nachmu Nachmun (talk) 12:23, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

For the most correct tradition of Breslov one should visit nanach.net and not rely on any source that is not rooted.

I've been to that site and was accosted by a quibbling nasty diatribe on the homepage against those of us here on Wikipedia who do not agree 100% with you. This hardly strikes me as "correct." If you read my comments on the various pages, you will see that I -- who am not a NaNacher -- nevertheless have defended that POV many times -- including on this discussion page. To be called names by you is hardly in the spirit of Rebbe Nachman. Rooster613 (talk) 09:14, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

Dear Rooster613 no one denies that you have provided many good additions to this page and others. Please understand that the Nanach are completely committed to the complete truth about Rabbi Nachman, and where most people stop caring and say, 'what's the difference' the Nanach just begin, establishing the correct approach of Rabbi Nachman.

Nanach.net, to the best of my knowledge, never made any diatribe against the wiki. Nanach.net just posted that one of the editors made important corrections on the wiki and that the wiki glaringly left out mention of the most important name of Rabbi Nachman. To this post there were two negative comments, but hardly enough to substantiate "a quibbling nasty diatribe on the homepage".

Who ever called you any names, on the contrary more than once I have commended your work and efforts. The only thing that is wanted is the complete light of the truth.Na Nach Nachmu Nachmun (talk) 11:53, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Dear Na Nach Nachmu Nachmun: Following are my responses to your issues, point by point. I do not believe that your objections to the way the article is written are valid. However, I do see the need to reference each point in the article per Wikipedia:Citing sources, which I will try to do shortly. Yoninah (talk) 20:12, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
RESPONSE TO POINT #1:
It is accepted by all Breslover Hasidim, those who lived in the true Breslov spirit in Uman and Poland and those who arrived later in Israel, that confession is good for the soul but that one can, and should, confess by the gravesite of Rebbe Nachman and other tzaddikim, as well as the Western Wall, the Tomb of the Patriarchs, etc. It is performed by binding oneself with the true tzaddikim, but confession is before God only. This is the accepted practice in Breslov circles today, has been even since before the “Saba” became a Breslover, and is in accordance with the true leaders of the movement. This fulfills the teaching of Rebbe Nachman about confession (mentioned in Likutey Moharan I, 4). But not to confess to another person. All the leading Breslover Hasidim of the previous generation (contemporaries of the “Saba”) agreed with Rabbi Yisrael Karduner’s statement that confession, if one feels burdened and feels the need to confess, it should be general. Yoninah (talk) 20:12, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

failed to see what your point is, but since you brought this up again allow me to show you a little problem with what you wrote. Until the above mentioned story of the Saba with R.Y.K. there was no differentation between general or specific confessions. Rabbi Nachman extols the importance of confessing to a living True Tzadik (see Likutay Moharan Tora 4). Being that according to the true tradition of Breslov there will not be any known revealed True Tzadik until the coming of the Mushiach, Breslover had no way of fulfilling this custom, so they resorted to making confessions at places where the spirits of the True Tzadikim rest. If there is a True Tzadik one should make a full confession, if there isn't a True Tzadik, just an ordinary person or rabbi or what ever, no confession should be made, what-so-ever. The unique question arose when Saba met Rabbi Y.K. and understood that R.Y.K. was one of the 36 hidden true tzadikim and therefore wanted to do a full confession. R.Y.K. in his great humility refused to be ascociated as one of the hidden tzadikim, but was unable to deny completely his holiness, so he told the Saba that he was only worthy of hearing a general confession.Na Nach Nachmu Nachmun (talk) 11:53, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

2. Fasting and self-denial.

This is not true, on all points!

Rabbi Nachman himself led an ascetic life his entire lifetime never deriving an ounce of worldly pleasure. His second marriage was with explicit condition that there would be no congen. ties. He fasted his whole life, except for special days when Jewish Law and Mysticysm advocates eating, except for when he was terminaly ill and was forced to eat at regular intervals. In addition Rabbi Nachman would afflict himself with all the types of castigation and tortures that are mentioned in holy sources, such as immersing in freezing cold water and the likes. At a very young age Rabbi Nachman prayed to G-d that he should feel the suffering of others even as they themselves suffered, and throughout Rabbi Nachman's life it was evident that he had fully taken on this resposability. Rabbi Nachman's holy book Likutay Moharan frequently discusses the importance of fasting and abstenance from worldy pleasure. Rabbi Nachman taught, also in Likutay Moharan, that fasting brings happiness! - this is the opposite of what the original entry here convoluted - may G-d and Rabbi Nachman forgive him - that ascetism leads to sadness, the redeaming point is that the original entry says severe ascetism, so maybe he has a loophole.

The original post is based itself - and misquoted - what Rabbi Nachman said in his later years, that had he known the power of speaking to G-d as he had realized then, he would not have subjected his body to such extreme stress endangering his health and taxing his strength. Rabbi Nachman himself, even after this statement continued his strong regimen of fasting and denial of any worldy pleasure. His apparent primary message was to convey that the strongest way of dominating and rectifying the body is through speaking to G-d, that this was what was to be stressed and practiced. There is however evidence that Rabbi Nachman did not have his chasidim do excessive fasting, such as the instance when he gave each chusid a regiment of days to fast during the year, to the chasidims surprise they were very few, Rabbi Nussun, Rabbi Nachman's leading disciple, if I recall correctly recieved only 3 days (besides the 5 common fast days). There is also apparently an oral tradition not to practice fasting so much. The story is told of Rabbi Israel Karduner, one of the 36 hidden tzadikim and the master of the tradition of Breslov in his era (he was the principle reciever from Rabbi Moshe Breslevor who in turn was the principle reciever from Rabbi Nussun who was the primary reciever from Rabbi Nachman. Rabbi Israel Karduner passed the tradition on to Rabbi Israel Dov Odesser fondly known as the Saba) who was priveleged with a visit from Rabbi Nachman, Rabbi Israel Karduner asked Rabbi Nachman if and how he should go about fasting. Rabbi Nachman took a small piece of bread in his hand, and replied that rather than fasting Rabbi Israel should subsist on eating only small amounts of bread as the size he was holding.

RESPONSE TO POINT #2:
I'm not sure what you're saying here. Rebbe Nachman did say in his later years, that had he known the power of speaking to G-d, he would not have subjected his body to such extreme stress endangering his health and taxing his strength. He encouraged prayer, not self-abnegation. It is not written anywhere that he continued fasting after he realized the power of prayer, which was sometime in the early 1790s, when he was in his early twenties. Additionally, though Rebbe Nachman does speak about the greatness of fasting, he usually combines it with a teaching about the effectiveness of charity, the power of which is parallel to fasting (see Likutey Moharan I, 37). Yoninah (talk) 20:12, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
Dear Yoninah: Unfortunately I don't have all of Rabbi Nachman's holy books with me, but if you look up that exact place where Rabbi Nachman said has he know etc. it is stated there that since he himself was already accustomed to the way of fasting he continued doing so. Look in Sichos Huran 162 which tells of a whole week fast Rabbi Nachman conducted in Zlot., which is after his return from Israel, preceding his move to Breslov (just before the age of 30), it says there that his difficulty with that particular fast was because people found out about, meaning that most of the time people were not aware of his continuous fasting. Also there 246 Rabbi Nussun describes the fashion Rabbi Nachman ate, in such a way that one doesn't taste the food at all. Also see the story of Rabbi Nachman's trip to Israel where it is clearly stated that then Rabbi Nachman taught himself to be able to actually eat even a little and thus he continued upon his return to eat an absolute tiny minimal requirement. Also see Sichos Huran end of 171 Rabbi Nachman says how abhorrent eating is that he has to force himself to swallow the food. Also see there how Rabbi Nachman would spend the entire Summer day from right after morning prayer (and it known that Rabbi Nachman did not even allow a drop of water in his mouth from upon awakening at midnight) till sunset - that's called fasting. Also see Sichos Huran 165 how Rabbi Nachman when saying over his great achievements let out a sigh and said, '...and I so much fasted', the Sichos continues to explain that Rabbi Nachman's intent was to strengthen the listeners to do so. This is list should be sufficient. Even what Rabbi Nachman said about the most powerful thing being speaking to G-d and thus not requiring all the fasting etc., the whole idea was to subject the body under the rule of the soul, and not to have any interest in worldly pleasure. This is evidenced again in the story of the 7 beggars, and is a recurring theme in all of Rabbi Nachman's teachings, to deny it is quite absurd and ridiculous!Na Nach Nachmu Nachmun (talk) 19:33, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
I think we need to keep in mind that life for a Jew in 18th century Ukraine was already very, very hard by modern standards. No running water, no hot baths, ice on the surface of the mikveh, no fresh vegetables in winter (and hence scurvy was common), extreme poverty, lice, fleas, etc. So if a person wanted to take on extra stringencies, he or she would have to go way beyond what most people today would consider normal self-discipline. As the old joke goes, "If our rabbi didn't fast he would starve to death." Hunger was a constant companion even without fasting. Meat was often eaten on the Sabbath only, the rest of the week was potatoes. So of course Rabbenu tried various extra chumras. But he ALSO said these are not necessary. Although he may have continued some of these practices out of habit, he did NOT advise his followers to take them on. And BTW, the same can be said of his advice to avoid doctors. In his day bacteria had not even been discovered yet, and surgeons didn't even wash their hands before operating. So yes, in his day doctors were often angels of death. But he was not necessarily setting a rule for all time. Rooster613 (talk) 09:14, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

Rabbi Nachman said about himself that he had no stringencies. You are right that Rabbainu said that stringencies are not necessary, and that in the Breslov tradition the followers were not expected to be fasting. See what I wrote about R.Y.K. - to eat the barest minimum. Regarding doctors, this needs to be adressed at length, properly.Na Nach Nachmu Nachmun (talk) 11:53, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

To break one’s material desires so that the soul, not the body, rules, is found in ALL of the Rebbe’s teachings. That the Rebbe fasted entire weeks is a fact. But nothing that Na Nach Nachmu Nachmun writes or quotes about fasting says that the Rebbe continued fasting in his later years. It says he ate very little, but that means he ate. He was conditioned not to eat, but he DID eat. Even when it says he spent the whole day in prayer does NOT mean that he did not taste something in the morning. The Rebbe discontinued the practice of fasting for his followers after his return from Lemberg in 1808. Yoninah (talk) 21:02, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

if you would bring sources I would maybe feel compelled to substantiate what I wrote. Know that fasting for certain amount of hours is also halachicly considered fasting, and is discussed in Breslov literature.

3. Fanaticism.

The Chazon Ish in his letters makes a very clear point, when dealing with keeping the word of G-d nothing can be branded as fanatic. For example wearing fringes on our garments must appear ludicrous to certain people! Rabbi Nachman urged everyone to adhere to every law of Judiasm so certainly he was what people would dub fanatic. There is something else that perhaps the original entry was drawing from, Rabbi Nachman once said that there are opinions that in order to succeed in worshipping G-d one must throw aside all resposibility to this world availing himself only to his worship, this Rabbi Nachman said, although in truth is not at all lack of responsibility, it is not necessary, one can still be successful and fully committed to G-d without doing so.

Na Nach Nachmu Nachum, The Chazon Ish was the founder of the Haredi movement, which you have elsewhere disparaged, so isn't it inconsistent to use him to defend your postion here? See please Shevachey Haran #235 where Rabbenu discussed the question of fanaticism vs ordinary observance. He is not referring to things like tzitzit as "fanaticism." He is speaking as one observant Jew to another, not as a secularist who might label Orthodoxy in general as fanaticism. In this section #235 he gives an example of how he once worried about water used during Pesach to the point of absurdity. It also states that he later ridiculed such obsessiveness (my word, but it fits here) and goes on to say "You should not be overly precise in seeking out restrictions." It is very clear from this section that the "fanatisicm" he refers to is this tendency for some people to take on more and more unnecessary chumras in the mistaken belief this makes them more holy. Rooster613 (talk) 09:14, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

it seems to me that you are fanaticly trying to find something to contend with me. The Chazon Ish, who I don't generaly follow or tell anyone else to follow, states a valid point, so why can't I quote him? The issue of someone being "mafkir" himself, is fanaticism on any level or scale of society, try it and you'll see.

RESPONSE TO POINT #3:
In Sichot HaRan (translated into English as "Rabbi Nachman’s Wisdom") #51, Rebbe Nachman clearly states that one should not be a fanatic. He then states that some people who are fanatics for this material world are the true fanatics. However, he then clearly states that even so, fanaticism which directs the person to cut off all ties with this world is an unnecessary fanaticism and is totally unnecessary. Yoninah (talk) 20:12, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
Dear Yoninah: The book you quote I don't have, but the original hebrew is right in front of me, there is no mention of fanaticsm, the word used is 'hefkeyrus' which means to be free for all, meaning people who absolve themselves from all responsability. May you merit to give up the inacurate translations and study the holy original books. This is exactly one of the biggest problems with the page, which states it's only sources and references on biased and imperfect translations. This is why the page must recognise Rabbi Israel Dov Odesser and the Nanach, who hold sacred every nuance from Rabbi Nachman and the holy Breslov books. You can see this firsthand how topics like these are discussed on nanach.net.Na Nach Nachmu Nachmun (talk) 19:33, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Also you purposely repeated and stressed a point which is not printed. True Rabbi Nachman said it that 'hefkeirus' is unecessary, but he didn't say "totally" and didn't reiterate himself, this was dishonest of you or the translation your quoting.Na Nach Nachmu Nachmun (talk) 12:23, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Yes, the original states hefkeirus, which means "free for all" — like hefker, something ownerless. If you read the Sichos text carefully, you will see that the Rebbe refers to hefkeirus as one who sheds his responsibilities of his obligations to his family, etc., in order to serve God. This hefkeirus is similar to dancing in the streets and on top of cars as is wont by the Odesser group, impeding traffic and annoying many other people (which we have witnessed many times) — directly opposing Rebbe Nachman’s teachings that the “marketplace” is the place of the kelipot and one must not expose himself to those kelipot. Yoninah (talk) 21:02, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

How does dancing on the streets constitute hefkeirus? Are you familiar with the history of Chasidus, that the followers of the Baal Shem Tov - Rabbi Nachman's great grandfather - were know for dancing in the streets?!

Rabbi Nachman told his followers to go out and speak to people, he never made restriction about not going to the market place, Rabbi Nachman just said that in the marketplace one should take proper precautions by denegrating the desires and impurities verbally, something the Nanach do all time when they say, Na Nach Nachmu Nachman MiUman!Na Nach Nachmu Nachmun (talk) 12:23, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

4. Stringencies.

This entry is once again not integral to its source. What Rabbi Nachman did say is, that all stringencies should be avoided (this is actualy found already in the Zohar, stunningly contradicted by the Chazon Ish who writes that one's fear of heaven can be measured by the stringencies he adapts), even still, one should favor one mitzva and fulfill it with extra care, but even this one mitzva he should not practice with stringencies! This is a very deep and important topic one which with the help of G-d I will address on the true and real Breslov site, nanach.net.

RESPONSE TO POINT #4:
The Talmud (Shabbos 118b) speaks of a rabbi asking another, "What mitzvah was your father most careful with?" The Arizal in Sha'ar HaGilgulim explains that each person has a certain mitzvah that he requires more for his perfection. This is what Rebbe Nachman meant when teaching that a person should choose a certain mitzvah to observe with all its stringencies. Yet, as mentioned, even in this mitzvah one should stringent but not overly stringent. Yoninah (talk) 20:12, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

What is it that you are trying to prove, or are you simply providing this relevant source?Na Nach Nachmu Nachmun (talk) 12:23, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

ADDITIONAL POINT (copied from above): For the most correct tradition of Breslov one should visit nanach.net and not rely on any source that is not rooted.

RESPONSE TO ADDITIONAL POINT:
"Na Nach" was and still is considered a very fringe element in Breslov circles and one should be very wary of any of their interpretations of Rebbe Nachman’s teachings. These interpretations should be thoroughly checked before being accepted as the "true and real" Breslov site. All the leading Breslovers of the previous generation — all of them — totally rejected the "Na Nach" chant and presentation of Breslov teachings. The Na Nach movement came into being only in the early 1980s, when the “Saba” was in his 90s, speaking Hebrew and Yiddish and was taken out of an old-age home to be cared for by English- and French-speaking baalei teshuvah, most of whom were well-versed with the then-drug scene and were seeking a guru to teach them Rebbe Nachman. Kudos to them for seeking the truth, but anti-kudos for misrepresenting a religion (Judaism) and a Hasidut (Breslov), things they were incapable then, as well as now, of perceiving. No, it’s a far cry from the "true and real" Breslover Hasidut. Yoninah (talk) 20:12, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
Dear Yoninah: Thank you for finally showing you true colors - your bias against the Nanach. Even still it is clear that only the Nanach are committed to uphold the truth and the veracity of the Tradition of Rabbi Nachman and Breslov at all costs, even when scorned by society and people like yourself. The Sabba was the strongest master of the tradition of Rabbi Nachman, everyone in Breslov that signed the Pincus Chaver - the group that took upon themselves to keep every custom set out by Rabbi Nachman - believed in the veracity of the Petek! The Petek was sent to the Breslov Chasidim in Poland, who returned it, if they had thought it to be anything less than authentic there would for certain have destroyed it or at best put it in geniza! Rabbi Moshe Feinstien the leading Rabbi of the Yeshiva Litvishe world gave his approbation to the Petek, Rabbi Moshe met with the Saba, when the Saba was in the 'state' that you described and was amazed enough to write of him an honor and title that he never gave to anyone his whole life! Rabbi Moshe describes and attests that Rabbi Yisroel Dov Odesser had great knowledge of Kabala!!! Dear Yoninah do you think Rabbi Moshe would say of you that you have great knowledge of Kabala, I don't think so, so please show great respect for the only person in the world Rabbi Moshe offered this praise! Honor his integrity, sanity, and ability to represent correctly, do not snub him!Na Nach Nachmu Nachmun (talk) 19:33, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
Na Nach Nachmu Nachum, I am midway between you and Yoninah. I do not consider myself a NaNacher but as you have seen, I am able to put my emotions aside here and use logic to examine the issues from all sides. I do not disparage the NaNachers if they choose to follow Reb Odesser -- in fact, I have at times defended them. However, I do not consider NaNach to be the true Breslov because I do not think any one site or rabbi represents the one and only way. Rebbe Nachman purposely did not found a dynasty because he did not want his way to become calcified and institutionalized like some other groups have become. He very much stressed that each person must "search for the Zaddik" and although many people read this as "find Rebbe Nachman," I think it has a wider meaning also. I think it means we must each search for a teacher that we, personally, can relate to -- one who is connected to our own specific soul sparks (netzotzot.) For you "the Zaddik" is Reb Odesser, for others it is not. Reb Odesser might be one flower in the garden, but he is not the entire garden. Rooster613 (talk) 09:14, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

[The following sources may or may not apply to the above discussion:

  • Odesser, Israel Dov (2007). "Israel Saba: Conversations of Rabbi Israel Dov Odesser". Jerusalem: "My Fire Will Burn Until the Coming of the Mushiach" Inc. ISBN 978-0-9797655-2-0
  • Odesser, Israel Dov. "Blossoms of the Spring". Jerusalem: Keren Rabbi Israel Dov Odesser Zatzal]
I have "Blossoms of the Spring" and I do not find in it any claim by Reb Odesser that he is "the only way." Mostly he lays out Rebbe Nachman's teachings in his own words but clearly based on the classical sources. Rooster613 (talk) 09:14, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

True. The main source for understanding that the proper way of following Rabbi Nachman's teachings is only through the Saba, is in the Petek, which clearly states: "upon you I said (was referring when I said) 'my fire will burn until the coming of the Mushiach'". However even without the Petek it is clear that the Saba has the strongest tradition in Breslov [having received it from R.Y.K. who was the main disciple of R. Moshe Breslover, who was the main disciple of Rabbi Nussun, who was the main disciple of Rabbi Nachman] no one else had such a strong tradition, and even those with a somewhat strong tradition usually clearly veared from the accepted practices of Breslov. E.g. Rabbi R. trimmed his beard, and others pronounced themselves as leaders.

If you merit to read the whole book, you will definitely have a much better understanding of what it means to be a true Breslover, and not some of the stuff people are dishing out.Na Nach Nachmu Nachmun (talk) 12:23, 24 January 2010 (UTC) Posted by User:Na Nach Nachmu Nachmun 16 Dec 2008


1. When a Jew confesses to another Jew, the other Jew is acting in the role of Rofeh Nefesh.
a) He is forbidden to talk of other sins sins of others.
b) All of King David's sins were already public.
c) Sin itself causes worries.
d) I would never presume to contradict anything that Rav Nachman says, but sometimes he teaches using allegories.
2. One cannot learn from the rebbe's actions what he himself is supposed to do
3. Of course.
4. a)The Chazon Ish is only referring to permitted stringiencies.
b) According to many opinions, the concept of chooseing one mitzvah and fulfilling it with extra care, is the definition of the mitzva of Kodoshim Teheyu and is one of the 613 mitzvot. Phil_burnstein (talk) 07:06, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Dear Phil: Most of your comments seem to be in sync. with my arguets except for 1a, and on that I would appreciate if you could do your homework - please study the Talmud Yuma 86 and Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chaim 607. Na Nach Nachmu Nachmun (talk) 19:33, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Sorry for the typo. Phil_burnstein (talk) 14:06, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Rebbe Nachman vs. Rabbi Odesser[edit]

Dear Na Nach Nachmu Nachmun: Most of the additions that you made to the Nachman of Breslov page really belong on the discussion page for that article. Therefore I am moving your comments there, so that other editors can also review and debate them. The long section which you added about Rabbi Yisroel Ber Odesser belongs on his discussion page, so I'm moving it there. In both cases, you are writing in a very expository, point of view, and un-referenced style which is inappropriate for Wikipedia. Please look at the editorial guidelines cited in the above welcome message to get a feel for writing for Wikipedia. Good luck, Yoninah (talk) 20:58, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Dear Yoninah: Your deletion and removal of every one of my corrections, additions, references, and external links, upsets me greatly. The reason you provided doesn't even pertain to most of the damage you did, and is unacceptable even for what it professes. Before I take this further, I would like to hear from you a better and more comprehensive explanation.Na Nach Nachmu Nachmun (talk) 14:57, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
To understand what material is appropriate for Wikipedia, please carefully Wikipedia's content policies, WP:V, WP:NOR, and WP:NPOV. To understand which links are not appropriate for Wikipedia, please review WP:ELNO, and in particular numbers 2 and 11 in that list. Thanks. Jayjg (talk) 06:29, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
Dear Na Nach Nachmu Nachmun, I am not able to research and answer your objections to the "His Teachings" section in the article point by point right now; I hope to get to it next week. In the meantime, I would like to point out that this is an article about Rebbe Nachman, not about Breslov Hasidut or about Rabbi Odesser (who has his own page, which you probably read already). A similar example would be the Belz (Hasidic dynasty) page which describes the Hasidut and the article about Rebbe Aharon of Belz, which focuses on the rebbe himself. If Rabbi Odesser said "I am Rebbe Nachman", it should be on his page, not on this one. However, it would be appropriate to add the Rabbi Odesser page to the "See also" section on this page. In the same way, it is very appropriate to include Rabbi Odesser and his philosophy on the Breslov (Hasidic dynasty) page. (It is already there; perhaps you would like to expand it with footnoted sources.)
I really think you should read the Wikipedia guidelines pages before you download all sorts of things onto the Breslov pages. It is obvious that you are passionate about Rabbi Odesser's teachings, but Wikipedia is not a soapbox (please click on that blue link to see what I mean). Everything must be clearly referenced so that readers can check the information for themselves. I recently submitted this page for peer review, and was told that I also need to insert footnotes from my sources, rather than giving a general reference section. I was also asked to "clean up" the huge amount of external links on this page to those that are exclusively about Rebbe Nachman. You will see that I moved your nanach.net website to the External Links section of the Breslov (Hasidic dynasty) page. Good luck, Yoninah (talk) 15:07, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Dear yoninah: We will B"H continue, can't right now, except that I insist you keep at least one external link to nanach.net, thanks to Jayjg I have read the guidelines, and unless you want to remove all the links to Breslov.org and the Breslov research center and the likes, all of which many Breslovers and many seculars consider extremely biased, slanted, and unreliable, you should not remove links to what many consider The official site of Rabbi Nachman!

I have no problem with ONE link to the NaNachs and if nanach.net is definitive of their group, then fine. But it certainly is not "THE" official site of Breslov -- there is no single official site (am I repeating myself here?) And to call the non-NaNachs "distorted" and "unreliable" is not NPOV. I have not heard anyone other than NaNachs call Breslov Research Institute "biased" -- mostly they publish English translations of Rabbenu's Writings and have a lot of this material on the Net for free. Hence the inclusion here. Frankly, Na Nach Nachma Nachum, it is you who are coming across biased here because you seem to be on a soapbox t promote your group above all the others. Is this REALLY what Rebbe Nachman would want??? I think not. He was very much against exclusive sectarianism. Rooster613 (talk) 18:56, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

don't know what you are basing your statement that Rabbi Nachman was against exclusive sectarianism. Rabbi Nachman often promoted exclusiveness.Na Nach Nachmu Nachmun (talk) 12:35, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

If a person claims to be Rabbi Nachman - in any way, and is substantiated in a remarkable way, it definitely requires mention in an article about Rabbi Nachman! How can you say otherwise?Na Nach Nachmu Nachmun (talk) 16:11, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

I disagree. If a person claims to be Rebbe Nachman (reincarnated?) then mention of that should be on THAT PERSON's page, not here. If I claim to be a reincarnation of Moses, would that qualify me to be included on the Moses page? I think not. If Odesser claimed to be Rebbe Nachman, that belongs on the Odesser page, not here. Rooster613 (talk) 18:56, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
Dear Rooster: If you were a recognised leader of Israel and were a strong proponent of a very definitive translation of the role Moses played, it would definitely deserve mention. Take for example Rabbi Shimon Bar Yochai who is known to have the soul of Moses, this definitely deserves mention on any comprehensive page discussing Moses! Our case is even stronger being that Rabbi Nachman wrote that his whole legacy is to be continued by the Saba - does that not deserve mention?!Na Nach Nachmu Nachmun (talk) 19:40, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
I still strongly disagree. A page on Moses should be about Moses, ditto for a page on Rebbe Nachman. Claims to be various reincarnations should be on the pages of the people who make those claims. And they should be stated as their personal beliefs, not facts, because it is not really verifiable who reincarnated as whom. (And I say this as a person who has written extensively on reincarnation, see the Yonassan Gershom page -- not out of my ego, just to verify that in some circles I am a recognized leader of at least a few people. And BTW my own book, Jewish Tales of Reincarnation, does mention Reb Odesser's claim to be a gilgul of Rebbe Nachman.) Rooster613 (talk) 09:22, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

Dear Rooster613, where did you come up with this bit about Saba being a reincarnation of Rabbi Nachman?! The Petek reveals Saba as a precious student of Rabbi Nachman. Also Saba once said that he is the mouth and 'ruach' of Rabbi Nachman, but I never came across any where that the Saba claimed to be a reincarnation. Maybe you misunderstood the analogy I wrote above about Rabbi Shimon Bar Yochai having the soul of Moshe Rabbainu?

I strongly agree with Rooster. How could Rebbe Nachman even write that "his whole legacy is to be continued by the Saba" when Rebbe Nachman died at the beginning of the nineteenth century and Odesser taught at the end of the twentieth century? Wait a minute — are you referring to the petek from heaven? The veracity of that petek has never been authoritatively verified . Rebbe Nachman himself said that Reb Noson would be the one to continue his teachings, and the Breslov tradition was ably handed down from Reb Noson to Nachman Goldstein to Abraham Sternhartz to Levi Yitzhak Bender and Eliyahu Chaim Rosen to the Breslov elders in Jerusalem today. Yoninah (talk) 21:21, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

Dear Yonina, the names you mention as the transmitters of the tradition are very untenable. Rabbi Avrohom Ben HuRan in Kochvay Or gives to possible candidates for the position of the chief disciple of Rabbi Nussun; his father and Rabbi Moshe Breslover. Not to mention that the tradition you mention resulted in serious mutation from simple directions and teachings of Rabbi Nachman. This itself is the importance of the Petek which you mock, it prevents people from making up their own traditions.Na Nach Nachmu Nachmun (talk) 12:35, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

BELARUS[edit]

Please see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Rosh_Hashana_kibbutz_(Breslov)

Likuteymoharan.com[edit]

Before we put this in external links, has anyone checked this site out?
They have one paragraph of LM, they have an advice column written by the Shechina herself, and no downloads or links. The sites purpose seems to be to tout a recently found book written by the Rebbe himself. It also claims to have a self portrait of the Rebbe. I have not checked out the site thoroughly, and I may be mistaken. Please someone, check them out. If they are legitimate, please restore the link.
Thank you, Phil_burnstein (talk) 09:02, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

I just checked out the site. It looks like one big promo for their book, The Wondrous Tree. Even the link to Likutey Moharan directs you for more information to their book. I agree with you that it should be deleted from the external links. Yoninah (talk) 11:21, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Christian name[edit]

Rabbi Nachman, this cannot be (officially) the complete name. Does he have a christian name (prénom in French)? There is a ringtone available for mobile phones that refrains "Rabi Nachman Yehuda"... but what is the person's complete name he was born with? 95.208.2.2 (talk) 23:56, 24 December 2011 (UTC)

For thousands of years, Jews were only known by their first names and the names of their fathers, such as Moshe ben Amram (Moses), Akiva ben Yosef (Rabbi Akiva) and Shlomo ben Yitzchak (Rashi). Governments began to impose surnames on Sephardi Jews in the 11th century and Ashkenazi Jews in the 18th century. As far as we know, Rebbe Nachman's family did not have a surname. As for the first name, that's what it is in Hebrew, and there is no Christian equivalent. Best, Yoninah (talk) 09:50, 25 December 2011 (UTC)
I agree with Yoninah. And I want to add that since Judaism and Christianity are two separate religions, it would be an oxymoron for a Jew to have a "Christian" name, so I assume what was meant by this is a "first" or "given" name, as opposed to an inherited family name? "Nachman" is a common Hebrew first name among Jews even today, and would be the name given at his circumcision (i.e., what he was "born with.") But, as Yoninah points out, the custom of having "first" and "last" names is a relatively recent custom, imposed on Jews by various governments (see the page Jewish surname for more info), and apparently not yet in effect in Ukraine at the time Rebbe Nachman was born. Rooster613 (talk) 20:40, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

Title "Rebbe" and not "Rabbi" or "Rav"[edit]

Why is Reb Nachman allays titled specifically as "Rebbe" and not like "Rabbi" or "Rav". What is this based on? I think something as crucial as this, should be mentioned on the page. Can anyone help with a reason and a source. I have so far not found anything on this in the books I have read. Thank you,EhadHaam (talk) 22:45, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

Some people (typically historians) do call him Rabbi or Rav Nachman, but since he is the leader of a Hasidic group, he is called Rebbe by his followers. Yoninah (talk) 23:08, 3 March 2013 (UTC)
Is there a particular reason why only Rebbe Nachman is titled "Rebbe" as oppose to other Rabanim such as Rav Kook, Rabbi Schneerson and the Rav, Rabbi Soloveitchick? Again, if there is, it should probably be mentioned on the page, shouldn't it? EhadHaam (talk) 17:34, 13 March 2013 (UTC)
This is really a discussion for the Rebbe page. Hasidic leaders are typically called Rebbe, while Lithuanian leaders are called Rav. Rav Kook and Rav Soloveitchik are Lithuanian rabbis; Rabbi Schneerson is known as "the Lubavitcher Rebbe". Yoninah (talk) 20:08, 13 March 2013 (UTC)