Until recently, the Polish sources were not available to biographers of the Ba'al Shem Tov. They emphasized hearsay and traditional Hebrew material that is full of colorful detail. They paid little attention to, or ignored altogether, some of the written sources from the Besht, as well as some of the testimonies. The largely prosaic nature, limited scope, and sparse detail of these sources seem to have relegated them to second place. Furthermore, the unsystematic, even arbitrary, way in which many scholars set about interpreting the Hebrew sources they were willing to use led to an often-confusing portrayal of the Besht. Scholars have been preoccupied with the Besht's “message” and “way,” to the exclusion of serious consideration of the physical, social, economic, and cultural parameters of his existence. As a result of this unbalanced and unsystematic use of the sources, the points scholars most commonly agreed on were largely based on the most legendary sources. Moreover, there remain fundamental contradictions with regard to the nature of the Besht's character and activities.

Within these limitations, however, some specialized scholarship on Hasidism over the past two generations has seen the gestation of a tendency to regard early Hasidism as evolving out of the past, rather than rebelling against it. In the late 19605, Shmuel Ettinger, basing his findings in part on the work of Israel Halpern and Yishai Shahar, declared that early Hasidism was not a movement of social radicalism but that it actually worked to strengthen traditional social structures. A decade later, Mendel Piekarz demonstrated that Hasidism was not theologically innovative; virtually all of its religious doctrines were anticipated or expounded by non-Hasidim. As elaborated in chapters 1 and 2., other scholars found earlier precedents for such essentials of Hasidism as the use of the title “Ba'al Shem Tov” and the existence of organized, Kabbalistically inclined groups. With regard to the Besht himself, Gershom Scholem, Avraham Rubinstein, Immanuel Etkes, and Ada Rapoport- Albert all showed various aspects of his connection to traditional concepts and institutions.

In essence, the preceding ten chapters have articulated and consummated this trend, at least insofar as it applies to Israel Ba'al Shem Tov. The primary thesis of this book is that the Besht was much more a representative and perpetuator of existing religious, social, political, and even economic realities than he was an innovator.