Meditation on Human Suffering

Consider an idea as a three dimensional object. There are six directions: up, down, right, left, forward, back.
  • Back: Past human suffering weighs upon us like a yoke. The inter-generational trauma prevents us from seeing a way forward.
  • Forward: The future of suffering is almost inevitable. We must share the stories and the trauma of the past for the future generations to prevent the suffering of others.
  • Left: Suffering may cause us to panic and to seal up our emotions, to restrict contact with others.
  • Right: Suffering may cause us to go manic and to open up our emotions, to share with others.
  • Up: Suffering may cause us to reach our true potential.
  • Down: Suffering may cause us to sabotage ourselves from reaching success.
  • Center: Suffering may be held within us, or we may let it go, or we may think of it like a passing wind, passing through us, providing us with a new perspective.

A Language Called Chabad: The Unique Expressions of the Chabad Movement

A Language Called Chabad: The Unique Expressions of the Chabad Movement

By Dovi Seldowitz

Chasidic communities are typically thought to consist of native Yiddish speakers whose English speaking skills are often somewhat limited. As the sociolinguists might have it, the Yiddish language is a tool for these groups to socialize their members, aligning them with the values of their community.[1] Chabad, by contrast, is known for a balanced bilingualism; speaking and writing in English is a non-issue in Chabad, the movement publishes its own Chasidic teachings in English, both as translations of existing works as well as original writings of English speaking authors. The fact that a Chabad community may speak English as a primary language does not mean they will speak in the same manner as the English speaking majority. It some sense, Chabad is actually a linguistic minority having developed their own peculiar speaking styles, often mixing in Yiddish and Hebrew words in their everyday talk.[2]

Social scientists have pointed out how ethnographic investigations of how language is used in various social groups is critical to providing a lens through which to view broader cultural processes.[3] Of particular interest is the phenomenon known as “code-switching”, using words from more than one language in a single sentence or conversation. Code-switching is frequently used by linguistic minorities to indicate group boundaries.[4] In Chabad, code-switching is used very often when indicating certain activities (outreach, celebratory, learning and identity) that have been shaped by the philosophy of the Lubavitcher Rebbe, Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson.

Examples of words that Chabad Chasidim use in the Yiddish or Hebrew original (often with the claim that the word is difficult to render properly in English) are shlichus, hafotzo, mivtzoim (all referring to outreach), farbrengen, chag hageulah, y’mei d’pagra, (referring to Chasidic celebrations) ma’amer, sicha, igros, chitas (referring to Chasidic texts), hashpoa, bitul, and hiskashrus (referring to the Chasid’s identity and relationship to his/her rebbe).

For Chabad Chasidim, the teachings of Chabad philosophy, Jewish outreach activities and the individual relationship between Chasid and rebbe is of central, utmost importance. While other Chasidic communities utilize the Yiddish language as a socializing element, Chabad must rely on a hybrid linguistic form to help establish and maintain the unique Chabad identity. A Chabad Chasid might translate ordinary Hebrew words quite easily, but words that are uniquely Chabad (“Chabadisms”) must remain pure and unadulterated, attesting to the significance these ideas occupy in the minds and hearts of the Chabad community.


[1] See, Ayala Fader, “Literacy, bilingualism, and gender in a Hasidic community.” Linguistics and Education 12, no. 3 (2001): 261-283.

[2] See for example, Sarah Bunin Benor, “The learned/t: phonological variation in Orthodox Jewish English.” University of Pennsylvania Working Papers in Linguistics 7, no. 3 (2001): 2.

[3] See, Fairclough, Norman, Jane Mulderrig, and Ruth Wodak. “Critical discourse analysis.” Discourse Studies: A Multidisciplinary Introduction, Teun A Van Dijk, ed., SAGE (2011): 357-378.

[4] See, Monica Heller, ed. Codeswitching: Anthropological and Sociolinguistic Perspectives, Vol. 48, Walter de Gruyter, 1988; Monica Heller, Linguistic Minorities and Modernity: A Sociolinguistic Ethnography. A&C Black, 2006.