Communities

Writing
Writing
Codidact Meta
Codidact Meta
The Great Outdoors
The Great Outdoors
Photography & Video
Photography & Video
Scientific Speculation
Scientific Speculation
Cooking
Cooking
Electrical Engineering
Electrical Engineering
Judaism
Judaism
Languages & Linguistics
Languages & Linguistics
Software Development
Software Development
Mathematics
Mathematics
Christianity
Christianity
Code Golf
Code Golf
Music
Music
Physics
Physics
Linux Systems
Linux Systems
Power Users
Power Users
Tabletop RPGs
Tabletop RPGs
Community Proposals
Community Proposals
tag:snake search within a tag
answers:0 unanswered questions
user:xxxx search by author id
score:0.5 posts with 0.5+ score
"snake oil" exact phrase
votes:4 posts with 4+ votes
created:<1w created < 1 week ago
post_type:xxxx type of post
Search help
Notifications
Mark all as read See all your notifications »

Welcome to the Judaism community on Codidact!

Will you help us build our community of learners? Drop into our study hall, ask questions, help others with answers to their questions, share a d'var torah if you're so inclined, invite your friends, and join us in building this community together. Not an ask-the-rabbi service, just people at all levels learning together.

Review Suggested Edit

You can't approve or reject suggested edits because you haven't yet earned the Edit Posts ability.

Rejected.
This suggested edit was rejected over 4 years ago by msh210‭:

Kozk?

0 / 255
What did the Kotzker mean by "If I am I…"?
  • Frequently attributed (e.g. by [Aish](https://www.aish.com/quotations/286954861.html) and [Chabad](https://chabad.org/4287676)) to _R. M'nachem Mendl_ of Kock is:
  • > If I am I because I am I, and you are you because you are you, then I am I and you are you. But if I am I because you are you, and you are you because I am I, then I am not I and you are not you.
  • I'd like good evidence or a strong argument supporting what he meant by this (or that he never said it at all). Two possibilities that come to mind are:
  • 1. If my actions are based on my looking out for only my own well-being, then I am merely myself and not truly part of the community.
  • 2. If my actions are based only on my concern for what others think of me, then I have no real existence of my own.
  • Frequently attributed (e.g. by [Aish](https://www.aish.com/quotations/286954861.html) and [Chabad](https://chabad.org/4287676)) to [_R. M'nachem Mendl_ of Kozk](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Menachem_Mendel_of_Kotzk) is:
  • > If I am I because I am I, and you are you because you are you, then I am I and you are you. But if I am I because you are you, and you are you because I am I, then I am not I and you are not you.
  • I'd like good evidence or a strong argument supporting what he meant by this (or that he never said it at all). Two possibilities that come to mind are:
  • 1. If my actions are based on my looking out for only my own well-being, then I am merely myself and not truly part of the community.
  • 2. If my actions are based only on my concern for what others think of me, then I have no real existence of my own.

Suggested over 4 years ago by robev‭