The Hassidic dynasty of Lelov — in Yiddish Lelover chasidim, named after the small Polish town of Lelów, in Lesser Poland — constitutes one of the most singular and most enduring branches of Hassidism born in the wake of the Baal Shem Tov. Carried by the Biderman family, it spans more than two centuries, from the Polish lands of the turn of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries to the neighborhoods of Jerusalem and Bné Brak, by way of New York. <cite index="3-1">Lelov is a Polish-Israeli Hassidic dynastic court that traces its origins to the town of Lelów, in Poland, where the court was established in 1815 by Rabbi Dovid Biderman (1746-1814)</cite>.
Every history of a Hassidic dynasty stands at the intersection of two regimes of truth: on one hand the archive — registers, dates, genealogies, catalogues — and on the other hand Memory — the edifying narratives, the court legends (maasiyot), the chains of spiritual transmission. The Biderman lineage illustrates this tension in an exemplary manner: its founder is as well known for miracles and utterances as for attested facts. The present work endeavors to distinguish honestly, chapter by chapter, what belongs to the documentary established, the probable deduced, and that which is transmitted by tradition. As David N. Myers recalled regarding the writing of modern Jewish history, the relationship to the past was always for Jewish intellectuals a matter of reinvention as much as of restitution [Myers, 1995]. The dynasty of Lelov, at once an object of History and an object of devotion, lends itself singularly to this double reading.
At the heart of the lineage stands the figure of Rabbi Dovid Biderman, commonly known as Reb Dovid Lelover. <cite index="6-1,6-2">The grand rabbi Dovid Biderman (1746-1814) of Lelów was the founder of the Hasidic dynasty of Lelov; he is commonly referred to as "Reb Dovid Lelover"</cite>. His spiritual formation places him within the master lineage of Polish and Galician Hasidism. <cite index="2-1">Rabbi Dovid of Lelov was a disciple of the Seer of Lublin, himself a disciple of Rabbi Elimelech of Lizhensk, who was a disciple of the Maggid of Mezritsh, successor and principal disciple of the Baal Shem Tov, the founder of Hasidism</cite>.
The founding notice of the family also connects Reb Dovid to the school of Pshyskha (Przysucha) and to the master Elimelech of Lizhensk, as confirmed by genealogical and encyclopedic sources. To these filiations is added, according to the tradition recorded in shtetl accounts, an attachment to the tsaddik Moshe Leib of Sassov: <cite index="4-1">a disciple of the tsaddik Moshe Leib of Sassov, influenced by the teachings of Elimelech of Lizhensk, he became a Hasid</cite>. This plurality of masters is by no means exceptional in the Hasidism of the third generation, where disciples circulated between courts and wove networks of spiritual allegiance that were often multiple.
It was in 1815, the year following the death of Reb Dovid, that the court of Lelów took institutional form in the eponymous town [Wikipedia, Lelov] — a detail that underscores how much the crystallization of a dynasty proceeds as much from the work of the heirs as from the charisma of the founder. Reb Dovid himself endures in collective Memory as the embodiment of ahavat Israël, the unconditional love of Israel, a virtue that became the spiritual hallmark of Lelov.
Onto this historical stratum is superimposed a vivid legendary stratum. <cite index="2-1">There exists a Hasidic legend according to which Napoleon Bonaparte is said to have questioned Rabbi Dovid</cite>. Such accounts, in which the tsaddik engages in dialogue with the temporal powers of his time, belong to the edifying repertoire of Hasidism: they express less a fact than a claim to spiritual stature. The historian records them as Memory, not as established event.
The image of Reb Dovid is not unambiguous in scholarly sources. While the court tradition celebrates him as a saint of the love of Israel, certain historiographical accounts cast a more complex gaze. The Virtual Shtetl dictionary presents the founder in a light that cannot be reduced to hagiography: <cite index="4-1">Hassidic dynasty founded by Dovid Biedermann (1746-1814), kabbalist and promoter of the Sabbatean movement</cite>.
This characterization deserves to be handled with the greatest caution. The accusation or mere suspicion of Sabbateanism — that is, of residual attachment to the messianic heresy of Sabbataï Tsevi — was, in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, a recurring polemical weapon in the internal struggles of the Jewish world of Eastern Europe. The work of Gershom Scholem has shown how deeply the memory of Sabbateanism and Frankism haunted Jewish consciousness long after the collapse of these movements, and how carefully one must distinguish historical inquiry from denunciatory rumor [Biale, Gershom Scholem, 1979]. The attribution of Reb Dovid to a Sabbatean current therefore belongs, given the sources currently accessible, to the realm of debate rather than established fact: it signals that the figure of the founder was, from the outset, an object of controversy as much as of veneration.
What can be held as certain, on the other hand, is the kabbalistic dimension of his spiritual character. Polish Hassidism in the lineage of Lublin and Lizhensk was deeply imbued with Lurianic mysticism, and Reb Dovid's inscription within this tradition is consistent with his genealogy of masters. The tension between devout Memory and archival suspicion makes this chapter precisely a place of intersection: tradition and scholarship speak to one another here without fully reconciling.
The second master of the dynasty is the son of the founder, Rabbi Moshe Biderman. <cite index="5-1">The grand rabbi Moshe Biderman (1776-1851) of Lelów was the second Rebbe of the Hassidic dynasty of Lelov</cite>. His birth is marked by the sign of destitution: <cite index="5-2,5-3">Rabbi Moshe Biderman was born into extreme poverty in Łachów, in the Holy Cross Voivodeship, in Poland, in 1776; his father, Rabbi Dovid Biderman, was the founder of the Hassidic dynasty of Lelov</cite>.
Moshe Biderman strengthened the dynasty through a prestigious alliance with the spiritual aristocracy of Pshyskha. <cite index="7-1">Rabbi Moshe Biderman of Lelov was the son-in-law of Rabbi Yaakov Yitzchok, known as the Holy Jew of Przysucha</cite>. This union sealed Lelov's rootedness in the school of Pshyskha, one of the most demanding currents of Polish Hassidism, committed to inner sincerity and self-refinement.
The decisive event of Moshe Biderman's trajectory, and the one that opens the branch known as Lelov-Jerusalem, is his ascent to the Land of Israel at the very end of his life. <cite index="7-1">The Lelov dynasty emigrated from Poland to Jerusalem when the son of Rabbi Dovid, Rabbi Moshe Biderman (1776-1851), settled there during the last year of his life</cite>. Tradition specifies the brevity of this final sojourn: <cite index="8-1,8-2">Reb Moshe Biderman of Lelov was regarded as one of the greatest rebbes of Poland; he traveled to Jerusalem and lived there seventy-two days</cite>. This brief establishment of 1851, sealed by his death in the Holy City, gave the dynasty its eastern center of gravity and founded the long presence of the Lelover in the Land of Israel.
The strength of a Hassidic dynasty rests on the continuity of its chain of Admorim (a Hebrew acronym for "our master, our teacher, our rabbi"). For Lelov, this succession is documented generation by generation from the founder onward. <cite index="9-1">The succession is established as follows: Grand Rabbi Dovid de Lelov (1746-1814), then Grand Rabbi Moshe Biderman de Lelov (1776-1851), then Grand Rabbi Eleazar Mendel Biderman de Lelov (1827-1882), then Grand Rabbi Dovid Tzvi Shlomo Biderman de Lelov (1844-1918), then Grand Rabbi Shimon Noson Nuta Biderman de Lelov (1870-1929)</cite>.
This continuous genealogy, attested by encyclopedic reviews, manifests the consolidation of the lineage following the displacement to Jerusalem. The third master, Eleazar Mendel Biderman (1827-1882), ensures the transition between Poland and the Land of Israel and durably establishes the Lelov court within the landscape of the ancient Yishouv, that Jewish community settled in Palestine before the great waves of Zionist immigration. The subsequent generations — Dovid Tzvi Shlomo, then Shimon Noson Nuta — perpetuate the transmission at the turn of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, a period of profound upheaval for the Judaism of Eastern Europe and the Holy Land.
The hereditary transmission of the role of Admor, from father to son or son-in-law, constitutes the characteristic mode of reproduction of institutionalized Hassidism. Lelov is no exception, and the regularity of its chain explains its survival where other courts, deprived of a charismatic heir, became extinct. The genealogy reconstructed here rests on reference sources and belongs accordingly to the established record, even if each individual date would benefit, in a work of fine scholarship, from being cross-checked against local registers and tombstones.
Like most great Hasidic dynasties, Lelov did not preserve the unity of a single court: it branched into several competing lines, each with its own Rebbe. <cite index="8-1">There are today several Rebbes of Lelov, in Bné Brak, in Jerusalem and in New York</cite>. This plurality reflects the common fate of Hasidism after the upheavals of the twentieth century: geographical dispersion, post-war reconstruction, and successive successions multiplied the centers of a single tradition.
The geography of contemporary Lelov thus traces a diaspora within the diaspora: rooted in the Land of Israel since the aliyah of Moshe Biderman in 1851, extended to Bné Brak — the capital of Israeli Orthodox Judaism — and to Jerusalem, it also radiates toward North America, following the general movement of reconstitution of Hasidic courts across the Atlantic. Each branch claims the same Polish source while cultivating its own particular emphases.
One must note here a characteristic feature of dynastic Memory: the Polish town of Lelów, emptied of its Jewish population by the Shoah, has remained a place of pilgrimage. The reputed tomb of Reb Dovid draws the faithful there, manifesting the persistence of an attachment to the original cradle beyond the rupture of extermination. This phenomenon, common to many Hasidic dynasties, illustrates the way in which the Memory of places survives the disappearance of communities. The recompositions of contemporary Jewish identity, and notably the tensions between the various sensibilities within Israeli society, have been analyzed with great insight by David Encaoua, who underscores how much religious heritages continue to structure the internal divisions of the present-day Jewish world [Encaoua, 2023] [Encaoua, 2024].
Beyond facts and dates, the dynasty of Lelov lives by a narrative treasure. The legend of the dialogue with Napoléon, already mentioned, is but a fragment of a vast corpus of edifying stories in which Reb Dovid embodies the absolute love of one's neighbor. Tradition holds that he refused to pray as long as a Jew suffered from hunger, and that he devoted his fortune to the ransoming of prisoners and the relief of the poor. These stories, transmitted orally and then fixed in hagiographic collections, cannot be verified by the archive; they are nonetheless essential to understanding what Lelov means to its faithful.
The historian must here accept a particular epistemology. Hassidic Memory has never claimed factual exactitude in the sense of modern historiography; it aims at edification, at the transmission of a model of holiness. As David Biale demonstrated in studying the manner in which Gershom Scholem read Jewish mysticism, the historian's work consists precisely in deciphering the meaning contained in traditions that were never conceived as chronicles [Biale, 1979]. The "counter-history" that Scholem opposed to the smooth image of rationalist Judaism finds in the legends of Lelov one of its materials.
The account of Moshe Biderman's seventy-two days in Jerusalem belongs to this liminal register between History and Memory: the number itself, laden with symbolic resonances in Jewish tradition, transforms a fact — the brevity of the sojourn — into a sign. It is in this interweaving of the verifiable and the transmitted that the Biderman lineage draws its depth. The effort of reinvention of the Jewish past, analyzed by David N. Myers with regard to modern intellectuals, applies as well, mutatis mutandis, to the hassidic courts, which ceaselessly rewrite their origins to render them alive in the present [Myers, 1995].
The Biderman lineage of Lelov offers the condensed essence of an exemplary Hassidic trajectory: a charismatic and controversial founder, Reb Dovid (1746–1814), steeped in Kabbalah and wreathed in legend; a son, Moshe Biderman (1776–1851), who transplants the dynasty to the Land of Israel at the close of a brief yet foundational sojourn; a chain of Admorim who ensure, from generation to generation, the continuity of the court; and finally a contemporary diffraction among Jerusalem, Bné Brak, and New York. At each stage, established History stands alongside transmitted Memory, and it falls to scholarship to hold both together without confounding them.
This Great Book has endeavored to honor that requirement of epistemic honesty: to acknowledge what is documented — the dates, the genealogy, the displacement of 1851 —, to signal what remains probable or disputed — the Sabbatean coloring of the founder —, and to restore as such the portion of legend without which the dynasty could not be fully understood. The Biderman family, from the small Lelów of Lesser Poland to the neighborhoods of the Holy City, thus bears witness to the vitality of a tradition that has known how to traverse exile, modernity, and catastrophe while remaining faithful to its spiritual heart: the love of Israel.
