Torah Review

Since 1995, Vaad Hanachos B'Lahak has printed a new booklet of the Rebbe's Torah almost every week. At first it was a weekly Reshima, a note from the Rebbe's private journal, and when all of the Reshimos were published a farbrengen or maamar that has yet to be printed or sometimes yet to be found.

This week's Torah:
Shabbos Noach 5724

For Chasidim who eagerly await the coming of Moshiach for a simple reason, that they will be able to hear new Torah once again, this is a shot in the arm against the current Golus.

On page 20 (chapter 26), the Rebbe discusses the Halachah brought in the Gemara in continuation of the statement (Brochos 31a) that one should depart from a friend in the midst of a discussion of a Halachah. This is in the context of the many guests who had arrived to spend Tishrei with the Rebbe departing after that Shabbos.

The Halachah is, one Amora mentions to another that these palm trees of Bavel are said to have grown here since the time of Adam Harishon. The other Amora responds that this reminds him of a thought on the Posuk "that no man has settled in", that only the lands that Adam Harishon decreed should be settled have been.

Interesting Halachah, no? There are other attempts to find the Halachah within this story. The Rebbe presents his view, that this refers to the Psak Din of the Rambam (according to his clarifiers/commenters) that although a Lulav taken from a tree used for pagan worship (an Ashera) is forbidden, if this tree had originally been planted for pure reasons, and is now used for pure reasons, even if in between it was an Ashera, the Lulav is kosher. If the tree was planted as an Ashera, even if it is now used for purity, the Lulav will not be kosher. Hence the statement of the Amora that these palm trees had been standing since Adam Harishon, and were never used for Avoda Zara, as A"Z did not present itself until Enosh.

The Rebbe also mentions that the later Psak Din of the Magen Avraham and the Alter Rebbe is that there is no difference what it was planted for: it should never be used for Lulav if it was ever used as an Ashera, and if you do take a Lulav and use it you have fulfilled your obligation, whether it was planted as an Ashera or not.

What is interesting here is that they have included two answers that the primary recorder of the Rebbe's Torah (Reb Yoel Kahan) received from the Rebbe. Although his questions are not included, which makes it difficult to piece together the meaning, it seems that they may have asked how the Psak Din of the Alter Rebbe fits with the Rebbe's interpretation in the Gemara, for if there is no difference in Halachah as to why the tree was planted, there is no use in knowing if Adam planted it.

The reply of the Rebbe seem to be that although the Alter Rebbe may disagree in the practical, ultimate Halachah, he might still agree that Min HaTorah this tree is only okay for Lulav if it was not planted as an Ashera. The discussion in the Gemara would then be referring to the Halachic status of these palm trees Min Hatorah. The second reply is much more cryptic, and I cannot make out what it is referring to with any certainty. Please feel free to help me out!

Matisyahu, the shame, and the blame game

Every Jew is a precious Neshomoh, and Matis is no exception. He certainly has a beautiful and versatile voice. Beyond that, I cannot comment.

Although everyone else may jump on the wagon of yea or nay, I really have no information on which to make a judgement. And neither do they.

I do not know whether his mashpia or mashpiim or shluchim he looked up to simply made a mistake, or they weighed dutifully their knowledge of his character and decided that his singing may lead him off, or his not being allowed to perform may lead him off.

I do not know whether the Shluchim who invited him to sing for them were relying on the judgement of his mentors, or simply didn't care. Knowing most of them, I think they relied on the judgement of his mentors. But I haven't asked them - how can I have an opinion?

What I see is that he has moved from strictly Lubavitcher notions in his songs, to Jewish notions, to universal notions - but still influenced by Yiddishkeit. He has not to my knowledge written or sung lyrics not in the spirit of Yiddishkeit. He has said that he moved from Chabad minhogim to general Jewish undefined Torah observance - which is still fine.

In fact, most Shluchim may now see this is an opportunity...

All I can truly say is, may Hashem bring a spirit upon him to protect him from completely losing his place.

The only lesson I can learn in truth, is to not voice opinions and condemnations when you have very little knowledge.

YU taken to task over David Berger

The Scandal of YU's Offensive Appointment

Courtesy of www.shmais.com.

A little hazy on the details, but a request at the same time polite yet forceful. Let the reign of defensiveness and apologetics end, let freedom of expression ring.

Did he or didn't he?

Sometimes you just can't catch a break from either side.

The Rebbe's attendance at university actually hampered his message that college campuses were dangerous places for a Jewish kid to be. Many times in private audience parents raised the issue, "but you attended college!" The Rebbe's reply invariably was that this made him the best judge of the harm the college environment causes. We know that this was not due to opposition to learning a skill, as he established vocational schools for learning a trade. The anti-religious and Bible-critical stance of major universities remains a negative influence on Jewish students attending college.

On the other hand, certain elements went out of their way to point out that whatever Lubavitchers had to say about the Rebbe attending college was a deliberate lie. If they said he was in Sorbonne, it was a lie. If they said he wore a yarmulke and a hat, it was a lie. They claim that Chabad promoted this claim to raise the secular world's admiration for the Rebbe. The earliest I actually remember this claim being raised publicly was in the book "Despite All Odds" of the late eighties, not published by Chabad.

The truth is: Who cares?

Let me make it clear that historical veracity is important, and we should know the precise details of the Rebbe's life when possible.

But truthfully, how does this impact the Rebbe's standing in the world? For over forty years the Rebbe was subject to the most intense public scrutiny. First by his students, who would stand honorary guard over his home during the scant hours a week that he spent there, certainly in his office located 20-30 feet away from the study hall of the Yeshivah, and later by the broader public. The Rebbe's conduct was the same at all times.

I could not care less if the Rebbe had spent the years before his Nesius in a secluded shack in Russia, or if he had spent them as a teacher in Yeshivah, or if he had spent them traveling the world fundraising, or if he had served as a public Chabad leader.

What I care about is the 40 years that the Rebbe chose to share with us, with me, at the cost of his health, his sleep, his family life and personal time. He cut short where he could in anything that did not affect his ability to offer himself to the Chasidim. If the Maamorim could not be written by the Rebbe, at least they were said. If Yechidus had to be stopped after 28 years, at least he could stand for hours for a brief moment with every Jew.

I did not see in a single moment I experienced with the Rebbe, in a single Maamar or Sichah I heard or learned of the Rebbe, in a single story of encouragement and demand of the Rebbe any influence of the Sorbonne. What I did see is the influence of the Rebbe on the Sorbonnes of the world, on Judaism in France, on the college students who found their spirituality in the Yeshivos.

A short break for entertainment

Sefer Torah stolen from MyYeshiva

I wonder, did anyone notice a certain element of MN wandering around the Yeshivah previously?

Perhaps he felt that as a spiritual descendant of the founders of the Yeshivah, he is entitled to inherit their property, and surreptitiously took an advance on his yerusha?

See how easy it is to play with reality, truth and perceptions?

He never had Paris

Stories abound of the Rebbe Maharash's public persona before he accepted the leadership of a much diminished group of Chasidim in Lubavitch, the other Chasidim having followed some of his brothers. He reputedly was never seen studying in public, would walk around with a newspaper in his back pocket, and did not dress as a Torah scholar or as a Rebbe's child would to demand the respect that such dress entailed.

One story tells of a Chosid (if my memory serves me, Reb Aizik Homlyer) told by the Tzemach Tzedek to direct his question in Etz Chaim (in Kabbalah) to the Rebbe Maharash, who went to the house late at night and noticed through the window the Rebbe Maharash deep in study with a table full of seforim. When he knocked on the door and was allowed to enter, the table was clear and a paper was in their place. When he mentioned his purpose and the Rebbe Maharash acted innocent and wondered why the Tzemach Tzedek would send a question in learning to him, Reb Aizik informed him that he had been "caught" learning.

The Rebbe's public persona until he became Rebbe was similar in a limited way. He could not disobey the previous Rebbe; he had to farbreng with the students of the Yeshivah when he visited, publish and edit the books of Kehos, and farbreng once a month with all the Chasidim. Yet what he could avoid, he did: wearing a grey hat, a short jacket, sometimes even walking around with newspapers, or avoiding having his name listed as the editor of HaTomim, the Chabad Yeshiva journal in Poland.

At the same time, the Rebbe's nature and habits were clear to anyone who came into contact with him. He spent all his free time secluded in the Bais Medrash (in Berlin) or at home (in France) in study. He was overly careful in every Mitzvah that he performed, going to great lengths to keep to his self imposed standards. He gave Torah classes in Paris at various locations. There are many individuals who attest to all of this.

However, certain elements have used these facts to "tell" their own story. With conjecture and anonymous sources, they wink and claim that the Rebbe led a not so kosher life in Paris, and perhaps before as well. The Rebbetzin's actions are up for grabs for them as well, although they provide no concrete "stories", only adjectives such as "modern". They claim that the Rebbe in fact ran away to France out of a burning desire to study secular subjects.

JEM has yet another segment on the upcoming video, and in this interview the son of the man who handled the money transfers from the previous Rebbe to the Rebbe states categorically that the Rebbe did not want to be in University, that the previous Rebbe insisted on it. One conjecture is that this was done so the Rebbe could accompany his younger brother in law, who did want to study. I can only hope that time will give us the reason for the previous Rebbe's insistence as well.

If anyone has any doubt as to what the Rebbe did with his time while living in France, why don't you take a look online at http://www.lahak.org/ and read the section of Reshimos. These are the journals of the Rebbe from his life before reaching the US. There is no French philosopher's pontification, there is no modern life to be seen there. Only authentic Jewish Torah thought.

The truth is hesitant, it takes time to emerge. Lies are instantaneous, they can be provided at the tip of a hat. Beware the magician.

This leads us to the next post: What difference does all this make?

The trainwreck of falsehood

This blog is inspired by one thing, and one thing only: the truth emerging. The truth is being ignored by those who posted the falsehood in blogs, in news interviews, or anywhere else - I'm sure it has spread beyond what I saw. It only takes a moment to publicize a lie, while the work needed to establish the truth endures long beyond the memory of those influenced by the lie.

I'm talking about the fact that the Lubavitcher Rebbe studied at the Sorbonne in Paris. Let's leave aside for the moment whether it makes any difference if the Rebbe was a student there or not. He was, and that is now documented fact.

One of the many canards of the online elements has been that Lubavitch and/or Lubavitchers created the myth of the Rebbe as student at the Sorbonne to bolster his standing in the eyes of the world. They granted that the Rebbe studied at a Technical Institute in Paris and did well, but no more. The greatest defense I could think of was that the Rebbe sat in on classes as an observer, but wasn't enrolled. How do you document that?

Well, an organization dedicated to preserving the Rebbe's history and legacy called JEM has just provided the documentation. The Rebbe was enrolled as a student in the Sorbonne for two years, 1938-1939. He is listed as a student in the school register. You can see this for yourself in their latest video, The Early Years part III.

May the truth rule. May the online elements perish.