Torah Review III

This week is the continuation of last week's:
19th of Tishrei, 5724 part 2

In chapter 16, marked as page 79, the Rebbe discusses the Posuk (Nechemiah 7,6) stating that when Ezra returned with the exiles they celebrated Sukkos as had not been celebrated since the time of Yehoshua. Since Sukkos had obviously been celebrated since then, this Possuk is explained in the Gemara to be referring to things other than Sukkos, and in the commentaries on Tanach to refer to the joy being greater than any since then.

The Rebbe takes the question a step further according to these commentaries: Why would there not have been a greater joy in the time of King David and Shlomo, when the Bais Hamikdosh was first built?

After first comparing these two eras to that of Baalei Teshuvah and Tzadikim, the Rebbe explains that the joy on becoming a Tzadik is not as great as that of becoming Baalei Teshuvah. This is evident in the fact that Pesach, the service of Hashem in the mode of Tzadikim, is not Zman Simchaseinu - Sukkos, the service of Teshuvah, is the time of greater joy.

In comparison, the time of Yehoshua was the time of Tzadikim - they had spent 40 years learning Torah in the desert, and the new generation had not challenged Hashem - [and perhaps that of Dovid and Shlomo Hamelech was as well, as they were all unified under one king and had external peace and it was the first time around for building the Bais Hamikdosh] while the time of Ezra was that of Baalei Teshuvah returning from Bavel to build the second Bais Hamikdosh. Therefore, the joy of this new Sukkos as Baalei Teshuvah coming to rebuild the Bais Hamikdosh was much greater.

You know, thinking of all this makes me miss Sukkos again - it's been a few weeks already. Missing Sukkos with the Rebbe - obviously as well.

Unsung Heros

This week has not been so good for Chabad news. A sister and brother, true both elderly, children of Rabbi Shlomo Ahron Kazarnovsky passed away. The wife of a supporter of Chabad from when it was not popular to support Chabad, or activities similar to those Chabad does, passed away as well.

Rabbi Shlomo Ahron Kazarnovsky deserves a book in his own right. He was one of the pillars of Lubavitch in America. His son who passed away, Rabbi Moshe Kazarnovsky, raised a family of Chasidim and his story will hopefully be told as well.

The two women who passed away can best be described regarding the public eye as wives. Their own lives were unsung, not even their names were commonly mentioned, at best it could be assumed from knowing and hearing of their husbands that there was a Rebbetzin Posner and a Mrs. Rohr.

Rabbi Zalman Posner was one of the first to be sent to arei hasadeh, out into the cities in the field, where Judaism was not quite a thriving enterprise. He served as Rabbi and is now Rabbi Emeritus in Nashville, Tennessee. He was a prolific speaker, a writer and an incredible example of a Chossid raised in America. I am sure his wife was his partner in all of this. Her role in her own right is unsung. Hopefully, her story will now be told.

I will continue to add links that tell of the life of Rebbetzin Risya Posner as I see them:
Great nashville religious leader died
Pioneering Chabad Emissary, Mother and Grandmother Passes Away in Nashville skip the short intro, first third of the article is about her
Quoted in middle of article

The second woman, Mrs. Charlotte Rohr, was the wife of Sammy Rohr. A philanthropist dedicated to Chabad from his life in Colombia, he continues his support of Chabad worldwide together with his son George. It would be incorrect to say that he was a businessman who happened to support Chabad. He worked to be able to support Chabad, and gave more than your average philanthropic businessman would consider properly balanced. They support every Chabad house on campus, Chabad activities throughout Europe, Chabad rabbis dedicated to Torah teaching, and more out of the public eye. I have no doubt that her support was crucial considering the extent of their giving. Yet she herself was never present when their name was honored.

May their souls be bound in the bind of eternal life.
תהא נשמתן צרורה בצרור החיים.

Manifesto

I have no fear of the world around me. I have no need to reassure myself that what I chose is correct. I have no fear of every thought placed out there. I have no fear of the sneer of others, of the snide looks. I have no fear of being labeled according to someone's prejudices. I have no fear of rumor, of innuendo. I have no fear of lies created out of this air. I have no fear that with time, truth will be told. I have no fear of hyper-intellectualism. I have no fear of debaters that think to crush the soul with argument.

I do have a need for truth, for clarity, for a position to be proven, not simply taken. So if you wish to come here and talk, please do, but you will need to make your case. Anyone can comment, all need to explain. If you can't, claim it as your personal belief, clarify what you have or haven't done in your quest for truth and reality.

Torah Review II

This week's selection is from 5724, 1964. It's the farbrengen for Sukkos, known as the Simchas Bais Hashoeva farbrengen, which was widely attended in those years by many young Yeshivah students from other groups, possibly because they were off from Yeshivah then and it was something Jewish, Torah'dik, Sukkos'dik and exciting to do. The Rebbe would gear his talks more towards them, although still uniquely his style and Chabad Chasidus.

It's the first section, the rest will be published in the weeks to come:
19th of Tishrei, 5724
You can listen along with the farbrengen here:
19th of Tishrei, 5724 audio
Don't mind the date of 17th Tishrei posted there, it is an error copied from the original archive on wlcc.org.
You can read in the original Yiddish as well, beginning on page 39:
19th of Tishrei, 5724 in Yiddish

The Yiddish seems to be a pretty much direct transcript as well, and is unique in that it carries the Maamar in the Yiddish transcript also. Usually, the Maamar is not included in the transcripts, and they only note that at this point a Maamar was said. The Maamar would (hopefully) be recorded separately in Hebrew. In fact, what happened is that some Maamarim were lost, either temporarily and are being restored now by Vaad Hanachos B'Lahak, or permanently.

This week is therefore not as unique, as it was previously available in its entirety. Nevertheless, there is always something unique in the Rebbe's Torah.

One of the concepts presented here is that Halachah and Torah change the physical reality of the world. In this case it is in the context of Simchas Bais Hashoeva being the ultimate expression of Simcha, part of which was instrumental music, yet the instruments could not be played until after the Yom Tov was over, until Chol Hamoed. Was the Simcha of the first day incomplete? Did the Anshei Knesses HaGedola, who instituted reciting the Brocha "Zman Simchaseinu" beginning the first night of Sukkos, also forbid the use of instruments on Yom Tov, thereby preventing this Simcha?

The Rebbe's response is that Torah changes the past as well. Just as the Teshuvah of the first half of Tishrei changes the state of the sinner so that intentional sins become actual merits, meaning that the past has changed to one in which you performed a Mitzvah as opposed to performing a sin, so too once you celebrate Simchas Bais Hashoevah with the proper instruments and reach the level of Simcha which is impossible at any other time, your first day of Sukkos retroactively becomes one of that same joy.

Similarly, although "there is no joy other than with meat" specifically of the korbonos, the korbonos were not brought until the first day of Yom Tov, meaning that there was not true joy on the first night of Sukkos when the meat was not available. Retroactively, once the meat is eaten and enjoyed, the first night attains that same joy and pleasure.

[An aside: this concept is discussed elsewhere by the Rebbe, based on the clear statement in the Gemara that the Sages determine the setting of the new month and therefore which day the holidays begin on, even if reality has to change to suit their determination. In this Sicha, the Rebbe brings other sources for this.]

You may question, what of the reality? We still must judge the one who repented to such a degree that it is as if he performed a Mitzvah - if he is guilty, he will still pay. We still remember that the joy our body felt was not as complete as now, when instruments play.

The Rebbe discusses this in the Maamar in regards to Mitzvos in general and those of Tishrei in particular, that now unfortunately only our soul feels this change in the fabric of reality. When Moshiach comes, our body will feel this change as well.

"Ashamti"

In a recent booklet given as a memento to the guests of the Krinsky-Dechter wedding, many intriguing and inspiring anecdotes and written responses of the Rebbe are included. Memento of Krinsky-Dechter wedding

The revelation in simple, workday terms of part of the Rebbe's schedule and relationship with the secretariat is interesting of itself. One response and work story that impacted me is a side note.

The Rebbe would regularly issue instructions for those who worked for him at home and in the field at the last moment. Every week found a new project, whether in the spreading of Yiddishkeit far afield or in the publishing house being ordered to finish a book in inhuman time.

In this case, the Rebbe had asked Rabbi Krinsky the week before Lag Ba'Omer 5750 if a coin could be produced with the emblems of this event to give out to the children. Rabbi Krinsky details the trouble he went to find out that striking coins is a process of months, until he found two companies, one Italian and one US, willing to strike the coins in time. The Rebbe chose the American, and added "Ashamti" - I am to blame for having given you last minute instructions, and if it doesn't work out I carry that blame.

Rabbi Krinsky, mortified at receiving this historic note which I believe is unprecedented, proceeded to make sure that the coin was ready for the Lag Ba'Omer parade. The Rebbe's response was that he should be given peace of mind as he gave the Rebbe peace of mind.

There is no blame in a single campaign that the Rebbe initiated, in a single instruction given. Not only is this belief based, that we believe the Rebbe was guided openly by Ratzon Hashem, but is evident in retrospect. Whether it be decisions made about public protests for Soviet Jewry, which city should have a shliach and which not, where a school should be opened and where not, public emphasis of Mitzvos for every Jew, all have been proven by time.

The blame the Rebbe laid on himself is for asking too late. No blame lies in the rush therein needed by the employees, the blame is in case the project did not work out due to the last minute rush. Every executive secretary wishes they could hear their boss say this about the idea they could not implement when given to them last minute.

But of course, the Rebbe didn't care.

Caring and human interaction

There are two polar opposites in caring for other people that lead to human interaction. There are of course many other shades of caring, but these two exemplify each other in the extreme. One is entering into interaction for an express purpose, expecting a certain mold for those with whom you will interact. The other is interacting to discover something new, to see what is good and valuable in every person, and interacting with that person based on who they are; not expecting more yet not expecting less.

These opposites, as all other forms of caring, would be a matter of opinion and preference if not for the Mishneh in Pirkei Avos: "Who is wise? One who learns from any person." There is obviously no baseline Mitzvah here, but there is the Lifinim MiShuras Hadin, going beyond the legal requirements, suggested by Pirkei Avos for being a better person: Be wise, by seeing something valuable to be gained in every person. Every person has something to contribute, and it is up to us to be wise and discover what that is.

By setting a standard for who we will include in a conversation, and what the conversation must entail for us to participate and decide if the person truly cares, we lose the wisdom of discovering something new in this person.

Certain elements have declared that the Rebbe did not care. Certainly, they say, he cared for ideas and objects, but he did not care for people, he did not see them as people.

I am not sure how this is possible in light of the fact that the Rebbe spent three nights every week from 8 p.m. until 6 a.m. for private meetings for everyone, allowing them conversation at their level. When this ended due to medical concerns, 6 years later the Rebbe began standing for hours every Sunday to allow anyone an opportunity to spend a moment with him, to say what they wish. This when every moment of the Rebbe was measured, to the extent that when he would come back into his office after Shacharis, as he took off the Tefillin Shel Rosh he would open the first Sefer, and as he took off the Shel Yad the next Sefer would be opened.

I might think of the story of the Senator whom the Rebbe suggested look into the new immigrants in Chinatown and make sure they understand the benefits and representation available to them. I might think of the Senator with whom the Rebbe discussed their desire to help the poor black out of poverty. I might think of the newly arrived irreligious Russian cab driver, who after spending hours pouring out his heart on his frustration with the lack of help he was receiving to settle in, found the Rebbe's eyes flowing with tears when he looked up.

It is the height of doublespeak to say that the Rebbe (and possibly the others so typified) did not care. If what the Rebbe did is not considered relating to people, if the Rebbe's care for every Jew in whatever state wasn't caring, then none of us care.

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.