In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

Religious Life At the very end of the eighteenth century, Hasidism spread through Minsk Province , and its followers gradually displaced the Mitnagdim.1 Hasidism came to Rechitsa at this time as well, and the two tendencies were in conflict there during the first third of the nineteenth century. By the 1830s, Hasidism had become the dominant religious tendency among the Rechitsa Jews. The chief rabbi in the town at that time was Vulf Strashinskii.2 All of the shechita (literally, “the ritual slaughter of animals and fowl in accordance with religious prescriptions,” Hebrew) in the town passed into the hands of Hasidic shoychets (a shoychet is “a person who performs shechita”). Apart from this, the Hasidic shoychets used smooth, polished knives for the shechita, and these had to be regularly presented to the Hasidic rabbis for inspection. The Hasidic leaders encouraged such a system in order to make the shoychets, who had to use the new knives, more dependent than was the case under the Mitnagdim . These smooth knives, as well as special clothing, had a symbolic character whose aim most likely was to demonstrate the spread of Hasidism and so exert some psychological influence on the “Jewish street.” Although the Mitnagdic leadership attempted to resist these symbols, they could do nothing since the symbols did not run contrary to the halacha (normative aspect of Judaism that regulates the everyday life of Jews). The struggle for control of the shechita was also important because everywhere it comprised one of the basic sources of income from religious services. With time, and with the stabilization of relations between the Hasidim and the Mitnagdim, the conflict over the selection of knives for the shechita subsided as well.3 154 5 Prerevolutionary Jewish Social Life and Education Prerevolutionary Jewish Social Life and Education 155 The discord between the Mitnagdim and the Hasidim in Minsk Province at the end of the 1830s attracted the attention of the province administration. At the time, this province had some mestechkos with an overwhelming majority of Hasidim, other mestechkos and towns where the Mitnagdic tendency was dominant (Slutsk), and yet others where the numbers of Mitnagdim and Hasidim were roughly equal (Bobruisk).4 In compliance with the instructions of the central administration, the governor gathered information about the Hasidic Jews, who despite being known as fanatical sectarians, were noted for their loyalty to Russia and their nonparticipation in the Polish rebellion.5 A decade later, however, authorities, under-appreciating their own success in the acculturation of Jews and their nurture of grazhdanstvennost’, by which was meant primarily an imperial patriotism, came to the conclusion that this nonacculturation was the result of the negative impact of Chassidic teachings. Il’ia Bibikov, governor-general of Vilna Province and the official in charge of the Belorussian provinces, again asked that information about fanaticism of Hasidic Jews be collected. Therefore, in 1853 a new governor of Minsk Province issued instructions for collecting material on the various religious rituals of the Jews and on their adherence to one or another tendency.He directed uezd administrations tosendinformationontheJewishSkakunyorKitaevtsysectsthatmightbeintheir area. These were the names given in the territory of Belorussia at that time for the Hasidim because of their swaying during prayer and their men’s suits made from kitaika (a type of cotton fabric). The Rechitsa administration passed this question toNokhemPinskii(1810–?),whohadbeenthetownrabbisince1851.Concerned that this inquiry might lead to repressive measures, Pinskii cautiously replied that the Rechitsa Jewish community adhered to Hasidic rituals that had existed since time immemorial. As to the Hasidim’s differences from the Mitnagdim, who had longbeenacknowledgedbytheadministration,therabbievasivelywrotethatthey lay only in the name and in some minor differences in the words pronounced during prayer.6 Nevertheless, this answer was not heeded, as was evident from the report of the governor of Minsk Province stating that the “Kitaevtsy” were “stubborn and malicious—and in their manner of thinking [were] irreconcilable foes of Christianity. Their actions [were] harmful not only to Christianity but even to their own coreligionists.”7 The last sentence provides some basis for wondering whether adherents of the Mitnagdicmovement might not also have applied this same characterization to the Hasidim. Fortunately for the Hasidim other information about them gathered by the administration was more complimentary ; as a result Bibikov did not agree with his Minsk subordinate.8 On the other hand, the maskilim (literally, “enlightened,” Hebrew; an enlightened Jew, follower of the Haskalah rationalistic movement mentioned earlier) also had unflattering things to say about the Hasidim at that time. Thus...

Share