THE social manifestations oflate hasidism-its successes as a popular movement, the new patterns of communal organization that it created, as well as the overtly messianic orientation adopted by some hasidic circles in recent times-have all distracted scholarly attention from the early conceptual foundation of the hasidic experience.

Hasidism is a complex phenomenon, marked by extraordinary literary diversity, a wide variety of social expressions, and a history which spans two and a half centuries. It does not lend itself to general characterization or definition. Nevertheless, certain shared conceptual patterns can be shown to have served as a premiss underlying diverse strands ofhasidic thought.

The present discussion focuses on the final decades of the eighteenth century. This was a period of rapid expansion for hasidism, with hasidic leaders reaching out to a wider audience not least through the publication and dissemination of the earliest formulations of hasidic ideas in writing.

At the core of hasidic thought lies the idea of the dual nature of reality. The two contradictory aspects of all existence are bound to one another dialectically. This duality applies to all dimensions of reality and mirrors the perception of the deity as a dialectic unity of oppositions.

The deity is perceived as a dialectic process of reversible and variable opposites. This unity of opposites is expressed in pairs of contradictory concepts: ‘expansion and limitation’, ‘emanation and withdrawal’, ‘revelation and concealment’, ‘creation and annihilation’, ‘unity and differentiation’, ‘being and non-being’, ‘yesh and ayin'. All these concepts clearly derive from the kabbalistic heritage of hasidism. But while the kabbalistic interest in dialectic opposites relates only to the heavenly realm, the new hasidic concern encompasses all aspects of reality. The principles of yesh and ayin are thus projected in hasidism from the domain of the Godhead onto the domain of religious awareness and divine service.

The concern with these dialectical processes has found diverse expression and emphasis in hasidism. The Maggid of Mezhirech, for example, was concerned primarily with the mutual transformations of the two poles. Bratslav hasidism expressed the tragic dimension of the paradox. Habad is more concerned with the dialectical movement between yesh and ayin. Polish hasidism has highlighted the embodiment of the opposites in the figure of the zaddik.