Friday, November 30, 2018

Always A Child



The Tolner Rebbe Shlita related the following story: Rav Yehudah Leib Zirelson was the Rav of Kishinev (Moldova). He was a great individual, but Kishinev was “off the beaten path” in terms of what was going on in the Torah world of his time. In other words, it was far removed from Central Europe and the major Torah communities of the day – Poland, Germany, Hungary, Lithuania, etc. Rav Zirelson used to correspond with a Polish Rav named Rav Moshe Nachum Yerushalmski.

One day, Rav Moshe Nachum received a letter from Rav Yehudah Leib of Kishinev in which he wrote the following: “I recently received a letter that a group of Rabbis intend to start a new organization called ‘Agudas Yisrael’ and they want to place at the head of this organization someone known as the ‘Admor of Gur’ (the Gerer Rebbe). They are asking me to go along with their decision. Please tell me, who, is this fellow known as the ‘Admor of Gur’ and should I acquiesce to his being given this leadership position in the proposed new organization?”

This is what is called “being out of it”. However, he simply did not know any better. He was stuck in Kishinev in Moldova and he simply did not have his finger on the pulse of what was going on in the wider Jewish community.

The Polish Rabbi wrote back to his colleague in Kishinev as follows: “Yes the Admor of Gur is someone who can be relied upon. He is in fact a great Tzaddik and indeed has thousands of Chassidic followers. Furthermore, I know that he is a person who has “Siyata d’Shmaya”. He is certainly worthy of the position.”

Rav Yerushalmski proceeded to relate the basis of his first-hand knowledge that the Gerer Rebbe possessed “Siyata d’Shmaya”: In my little village there is a Jew named Rav Sheinfeld, who happens to be the uncle of the Gerer Rebbe. Every so often, the Gerer Rebbe comes to visit this uncle and — as was the custom in Europe – whenever a visiting Rabbi visits another town, he pays a courtesy visit to the town’s official Rabbi (Moreh d’Asra). Therefore, I had yearly visits from the Gerer Rebbe. During one visit, I was discussing with him the weekly parsha and I told him that I had a question on Parshas Vayeshev.

The pasuk states that “Yosef was a ‘na-ar’ [youth or lad] with the sons of Bilhah and the sons of Zilpah” [Bereshis 37:2]. The Medrash questions the use of the term ‘naar’ here, which connotes a young immature child, as at this time Yosef was already 17 years old. The Medrash infers from this description that Yosef did childish things. Rashi, citing the Medrash, explains that Yosef used to fix his hair and groom his eyes so that he should look attractive.

Rav Yerushalmski asked the Gerer Rebbe, that by Akeidas Yitzchak, the pasuk says, “I and the ‘na-ar’ will go up to here” [Bereshis 22:5] where the word ‘na-ar’ refers to Yitzchak, even though he was 37 years old at the time! Why does the Medrash not question the use of the term na-ar for Yitzchak, who was more than twice as old as Yosef when he was described as a na-ar?

The Gerer Rebbe dismissed the question. He explained that in the story of the Akeidah, Avraham Avinu called Yitzchak a na-ar. To a father, a child is always a child! It is not at all noteworthy to hear a father refer to his son, regardless of his age, as a young child. However, in Parshas Vayeshev, the Torah calls Yosef a na-ar, not his father. Therefore, this usage can be used for Medrashic exposition!

Rav Yerushalmski, who lived on the second floor of his building, went to accompany the Gerer Rebbe out of his apartment when the visit was over. A 100 year old widow lived on the first floor of the building. The widow came out of her house and upon seeing the Gerer Rebbe she asked him for a Bracha. The Rebbe gave her a bracha. This woman had a son who was 80 years old. She then requested of the Rebbe “Give my little one a blessing as well.” Here then was an 80 year old man who was referred to as “my little one” by his mother.

The point of Rav Yerushalmski was that literally within moments of the Gerer Rebbe giving an answer to the question, his insight was validated with a real life story, proving from Heaven as it were, that the ‘vort’ was true!

The Tolner Rebbe Shlita asks on this answer of the Gerer Rebbe one basic question: In the Akeida we find a later pasuk in which the Angel from Heaven calls out to Avraham and also uses the term ‘na-ar’: “Do not send forth your hand to the ‘na-ar'” [Bereshis 22:12]. This was not a parent speaking. Why then does the Medrash ignore the Torah’s use the term na-ar by Akeidas Yitzchak?

The Tolner Rebbe answers that the Angel speaks in the Name of Hashem and to the Almighty, every Jew is like a child! “For Israel was a na-ar and I loved him…” [Hoshea 11:1]; “Children are you to the L-rd your G-d” [Devorim 14:1]. Once we are like the sons of G-d, it is understandable why we should always be thought of as a young lad (na-ar).

[Rabbi Frand] 

Thursday, November 29, 2018

Not Just Lip Service

Probably the best, and certainly the most popular, book written on the work performed by the Lubavitch shluchim is The Rebbe’s Army, by Sue Fishkoff, a journalist. Though Fishkoff did not choose to become a Chabadnik, or in any way Orthodox, by the time she finished writing the book, the experience of immersing herself for a year within Chabad profoundly affected her. The changes were not because she witnessed public Chanukah candle lightings for thousands of Jews or saw otherwise secular men putting on tefillin, or nonobservant women lighting Shabbat candles. What most affected Fishkoff was a series of kind, loving acts directed both to others and to herself
that she witnessed repeatedly over the year during which she was writing her book: “[These people] incorporate into their daily lives the Jewish values to which most of us give lip service: They visit the sick. They comfort the grieving. They take care to avoid embarrassing others.” 

On the day that Fishkoff completed a visit to Chabad in Minneapolis, Rabbi Moshe Feller, the city’s head shliach, dropped her off at the airport for her trip home to California. Fishkoff recalls that as she was waiting for the flight, she looked over the sandwiches at the airport food stands and dis- covered that all that remained for sale that day were ham and cheese sandwiches, and “whereas ordinarily I wouldn’t think twice, this time I hesitated. It felt wrong, somehow, after spending a weekend with Chabad, to eat trayf so soon. Maybe that’s silly, but I just couldn’t do it.” Then, as Fishkoff, now anticipating a long trip without food, proceeded to the security checkpoint, she saw Rabbi Feller “running around the waiting area, clutching a small brown paper bag to his chest. Seeing me, he ran up and thrust the bag into my hand. ‘I got home, and my wife couldn’t believe I let you go without giving you lunch,’ he apologized. ‘Here, please, you shouldn’t go hungry.’ Inside the bag were neatly wrapped slices of kosher cheese, some bread, a cookie, and a bottle of juice. I almost cried.”

[The Life And Times Of Rabbi MM Schneeorson]

Wednesday, November 28, 2018

It Ain't Over Till ...

Yogi Berra was asked what he wanted writen on his tombstone. He responded [I'm not making this up] - 

"It's over". 

Speak Out

"In a free society, some are guilty, but ALL are responsible". 

We must remember that. 

Elchonon Ehrman : Beis Din Hagadol Outside Yerushalayim

Link

The state of the world today. VERY VERY VERY UNSETTLING TO SAY THE LEAST. 

See the video at the end. 

Siyum Hashas - Daf Yomi Through The Decades

PLEASE DAVEN

YEHUDIS CHAYA BAS DINA BASYA!!

She is due ANY DAY and has had some difficult births. May this one go SMOOOOOTHLY!!

HASHAVAS AVEIDAH!!

Concentration Camps Today?

This is one of many articles on what are being called "concentration camps" in China: 

China continues to see the uproar over its creation of concentration camps holding as many as 1 million ethnic Uighurs and others as a public-relations problem. In recent days, the government issued another white paper claiming it is protecting religious freedom and culture in the autonomous northwestern province of Xinjiang, despite evidence that it has corralled much of the Muslim population into spartan camps for forced brainwashing.

That is why recently introduced bipartisan legislation in Congress is vitally important. China's leaders have dissembled for a year and cannot be allowed to escape accountability for the massive indoctrination and internment drive. Exposure of the camps--by witnesses, scholars, nongovernmental organizations and Western governments--has been extremely important. But China's leaders are not shamed. They are old hands at repression.


The Uighur Human Rights Policy Act of 2018--introduced with bipartisan sponsors, including Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla.; Sen. Robert Menendez of New Jersey, the ranking Democrat on the Foreign Relations Committee; and Rep. Christopher Smith, R-N.J., in the House--calls for creating a U.S. special coordinator for Xinjiang to respond to the crisis, as well as paving the way for applying Global Magnitsky Act sanctions on specific Chinese officials responsible for the human rights violations.

The legislation, if enacted, would mandate a report to Congress identifying Chinese firms contributing to the camps and ubiquitous surveillance systems in Xinjiang, perhaps leading to the sanctioning of these companies, and would empower the FBI to track down Chinese officials responsible for harassing Uighurs in the United States. When Uighurs outside China have protested what is happening, their relatives in Xinjiang have been hauled off to camps and other locations.

Congress needs to act to fill a vacuum left by the Trump administration, which has said and done little about the Xinjiang repression. In Beijing, in an initiative led by Canada, 15 Western ambassadors have sought a meeting to express concern, but the United States did not join. It should. Most of the world's majority-Muslim nations have been unconscionably mute about the repression; the United States should stand with other liberal democracies.

China has justified its actions as counterterrorism and "preventing extremism," but it hardly makes sense to imprison 11.5 percent of the Muslim population of Xinjiang between the ages of 20 and 79, as has been estimated by some experts. Forcing tens of thousands of people into jails and then trying to wipe away their language and culture are crimes against an entire people. No amount of spin can conceal it.

Cultured But Depraved

Rabbi Dr. Moshe Berger of Cleveland’s Siegal College of Judaic Studies recalls a Saturday-afternoon informal discussion in Brookline, Massachusetts, at which people were posing questions to Rabbi Soloveitchik. At one point, he remembers the Rav speaking of a class he had attended in Germany taught by Professor Martin Heidegger, widely regarded as the greatest German philosopher of the twentieth century. The Rav remembered Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson also attending the sessions, and his surprise at seeing the future Rebbe studying Tanya, the basic Chabad philosophic text, while Heidegger was lecturing. 

When the lecture concluded, the Rav asked the future Rebbe why he bothered coming to the class if he was going to spend his time studying a Jewish text instead of listening to the professor. Thereupon the Rebbe proceeded to repeat with full comprehension the major points the professor had made. So impressed was the Rav that at the following lecture, he brought with him a volume of the Mishnah and started to study it. He discovered, however, that he became so caught up in the Mishnaic text that he could not absorb any of what Heidegger was saying, and when he tried to focus on the philosopher’s words, it was impossible for him to study the Mishnah. The Rav was obviously telling this story to underscore the Rebbe’s very unusual and impressive ability to simultaneously focus on different intellectual disciplines, a trait attested to by different people over the course of his life. 

But implicit in this story, too, is another message, one known to all students of Heidegger and to those familiar with modern intellectual history. Just a few years later, Heidegger, a man of powerful intellect, became a Nazi. In April 1933, when he assumed the rectorship of Freiburg University, he declared at his inaugural address: “The Führer himself and alone is today and in the future German reality and its law.” Heidegger finished the speech with three “Heil Hitlers!” Several days later, on April 10, 1933 (by which time both Rabbis Soloveitchik and Schneerson had left Germany), Heidegger instructed his deans to dismiss all faculty members who professed the Jewish religion or were of Jewish background. 

That great evil and stupidity can coexist in a person of immense intellectual capabilities is best illustrated by an incident recorded by the anti-Nazi philosopher Karl Jaspers. Shortly after Hitler’s rise to power, Jaspers asked Heidegger, “How can a man as coarse as Hitler govern Germany?” Heidegger responded, “Culture is of no importance. Just look at his marvelous hands.” It is likely that the Rebbe’s deep disappointment with the moral quality of so many of “Hitler’s professors” (as pro-Nazi professors came to be known) was one factor that inclined him to want to protect his followers from exposure to the world of academia, particularly during their formative years. As was noted in a different context and, as the Rebbe wrote to Professor Velvel Greene, “For it was           precisely the nation which had excelled itself in the exact sciences, the humanities, and even in philosophy and ethics, that turned out to be the most depraved nation in the world”.

[The Life And Times Of Rabbi MM Schneerson] 

Tuesday, November 27, 2018

Women's Hakafos

Rabbi Shlomo Riskin in his autobiography related that he allowed the women in his shul to dance with the Sefer Torah on Simchas Torah. This is not surprising as he is known to have "progressive" views on various issues [permitting army service for girls, a very positive view of Yoshke etc. etc.]. What IS surprising is that after this occurred and he was attacked by a chashuv Rov on the West Side who pronounced him Conservative that he went to the Lubavitcher Rebbe who told him [after R' Riskin explained that otherwise, we will lose these women to Judaism forever] that not only MAY he allow it but MUST allow it. 

Wow!! A Chasidic Rebbe who rules that one should eliminate an established custom of Jews [that only men dance with the Torah]! Very hard for a traditionalist like me to swallow. But I guessed that he felt that better this custom be set aside than the entire Torah and this is the way to save their souls.   
In this link the FULL STORY is presented. The conclusion is that CHAS VI-SHALOM that the Rebbe concluded that it is permitted. Ahhhhhh! The slope is VERY steep and slippery. וד"ל. [I don't recall that R' Riskin mentioned in his book that the Rebbe retracted but maybe he did]. 


Yahrtzeit

Today is the yahrtzeit of Rav Yitzchak Hutner ztz"l. He changed my life, he can change yours, too. I invite you to learn from his sfarim or listen to one of the over 100 shiurim I have on line based in his Torah or one of the many posts on the blog about him or based on his Torah.

טעמו וראו כי טוב השם!!! 

Rav Lau's Memoirs



Translated excerpts from the memoirs of Rav Yisrael Meir Lau:




First Memories: Devastation, Autumn 1942

The nightmare had begun to affect us in Piotrkow as well.

It is the autumn of 1942. I, Lulek, am a boy of five years and four months, short in stature, terrified. I stretch my neck as far as it will go in order to catch a glimpse of my father. He is standing in the Umschlagplatz, the assembly point for deportation, which is next to the Great Synagogue of our town, Piotrkow, Poland. Father, with his impressive beard and black rabbi’s suit, stands in the center, surrounded by Jews.

We felt enormous tension that day as we stood in the assembly square in front of the synagogue. A threatening silence surrounded us. The captain of the Piotrkow Gestapo approached my father, a deadly look in his eye. He stopped, and pulling out his maikeh—a rubber club about three feet long—he began to beat my father on the back with all his might. When the first blow struck my father from behind, the force of it made him stagger forward. His body bent over as if about to fall. And then, in a fraction of a second, he straightened up to his full height, stepped back and returned to where he had been standing. There he stood erect, making a supreme effort to hide the physical pain as well as the intense humiliation. I could see Father mustering all his strength to keep his balance and avoid falling at the German officer’s feet. Father knew that if he fell, the spirit of the Jews in our town would break, and he was trying desperately to prevent that.

Everyone there knew why the German had beaten him. When the Nazis had ordered the Jews to shave off their beards, many of the Jews of Piotrkow had come to ask Father whether they should follow the order. His answer was firm: do it in order to save yourselves from punishment. But he was stricter with himself; he kept his beard and sidelocks, his peiyos, not only to safeguard ancient tradition but also to preserve the honor of the town rabbinate. His defiance of this order resulted in the maikeh on his back.

But the beating was for other reasons as well. The captain had singled out my father for abuse because he was the chief rabbi of the town. Father was the representative of the Jews to the Germans. Furthermore, much of the Gestapo’s contact with the Jews of Piotrkow took place through him because he was fluent in German. He was a highly respected figure in the Jewish community. Beating him, and especially humiliating him, meant more to the Germans than beating just another Jew; it was an act of enormous symbolic meaning, one that had a powerful effect on morale. 

Many years later, I heard the following from Dr. Abraham Greenberg, who had been standing next to my father in the synagogue square. He heard Father remark to the Jews next to him, “I don’t know why we’re standing here with our arms crossed. Even if we don’t have weapons, we should attack them with our fingernails. I don’t think standing around can save any of us. We have nothing to lose by trying to fight them.” He had just finished his sentence when the maikeh of the Gestapo captain struck him on his back. As a child, I did not understand the issue of the beard so well or the significance of the order to shave it, but I did understand that they were beating my father.

I knew my father was the town’s chief rabbi, and was admired and loved by all. I could not bear to see the beating or the degradation. Today, looking back on the six years of that war, I realize that the worst thing I endured in the Holocaust was not the hunger, the cold or the beatings. It was the humiliation. It is almost impossible to bear the helplessness. Throughout the war years, a Polish word went through my head—lachago, meaning “why?” What did we do to you to make you stomp on our souls in this way? How great was our crime that this is our punishment? There was no answer. Only this: we were Jews, and they, the Nazis, saw us as the source of all evil in the world.

When a child sees his father being kicked with a Nazi’s boot publicly humiliated, he carries that terrible picture with him for the rest of his life. Yet, on the other hand, I carry in my mind another memory as well—that instant in which Father, with astonishing spiritual strength, braced himself from falling and, refusing to beg for his life, stood tall once again before the Gestapo captain. For me, that image of his inner spiritual strength completely eradicates the helplessness that accompanied the humiliation.

Herded into the Synagogue

Soon after the incident with Lulek’s father, the Nazis rounded up the Jews of Piotrkow and packed them into the town’s main synagogue. There they called out the names of those who were allowed to leave; those remaining inside were to be deported, destined for death. Through his mother’s resourcefulness, young Lulek’s life is saved, but his thirteen-year-old brother, Shmuel, is condemned to a bitter fate.

As order and discipline were second nature to the Germans, one of them shouted, “One of the people whose names I called did not go out!” Then they made an exact count of all those who had left, and checked them against their lists. One person had not left: my mother. Her maternal instinct aroused, she scrutinized the narrow passage between the two guards at the door. She planned our moves quickly and precisely. She grabbed me with one hand, and Shmuel with the other. “Come here,” she ordered. We jumped to her. We didn’t need to be told that we must remain completely silent, and more importantly, keep as close as possible to Mother. The three of us had to meld together as one. She planned to smuggle us both out under the cover of darkness, as if we were part of her body. To keep the Germans from closing the door, she shouted while moving toward the exit, “I’m coming, I’m coming.” Walking sideways as one body, we shuffled out the door. But a group of three could not possibly pass through the narrow opening the Germans had left. I went out first, with Mother close behind me, and Shmuel behind her. But one German noticed that there was a bit more movement than there should be. Facing us, he raised both his arms together, and swung them down with all his might, one to the left and one to the right. Shmuel, who was on the left side, fell to the synagogue floor and had to go back inside. On the right side were my mother and I. The force of the blow hurled us into a puddle in front of the synagogue.

Throughout the war years, a Polish word went through my head—lachago, meaning “why?” What did we do to you to make you stomp on our souls in this way?

The two of us were saved, but we were separated from Shmuel, and we never saw him again. Later we learned that he was sent to Treblinka that same day.

Into Hiding: 1942

Lulek’s childhood becomes a nightmare of hiding and fear, leaving an indelible mark on his memory and shaping his consciousness. As an adult, Rabbi Lau recalls the taste of the honey cookies mentioned here as symbolic of his Holocaust experience.

Father was not with Mother and me when the two of us hid at 12 Jerozolimska Street, a building near our house, where he had arranged a hiding place for us. This large building had been filled with Jewish residents, who then abandoned it for reasons unknown to me. The floor of one room in the top story was littered with wooden boards; the entry to the attic was through this room. Mother and I crowded into the attic along with about ten other Jews. They were constantly darting frightened looks at me, as if threatening me to keep silent, and at my mother, as if blaming her for bringing me to the hiding place and possibly endangering their lives. At least that is how it seemed to me. I was barely five-and-a-half, and they feared I would cry noisily, or else call out “Mameh, Mameh,” giving them all away to certain death. They were busy thinking of ways to make the child keep silent, but the child never even made a peep. Before leaving our house, my mother had foreseen what was ahead of us, and baked my favorite honey cookies. She knew that when I ate them they would distract me. More importantly, they would fill up my mouth so I would be unable to make a sound.

Even today, many long years after those days of horror, when I close my eyes and yearn for those honey cookies, I can remember their wonderful taste. During trying times, this memory is my consolation; it is the drop of honey with which I sweeten bitter days.

At the same time, I remember clearly that I would look at my mother, my mouth full of cookies, with a penetrating glance that seemed to say, “Mother, this whole business of using the cookies to silence me is unnecessary. I know I mustn’t say a word, and therefore I intend to keep quiet. We have already been through all kinds of ‘selections’ and although I am a child, I understand exactly what’s going on.” Like an animal with an acute survival instinct, I understood that I had to keep quiet until the fury subsided, and I had no intention of behaving like a small child in our hideout.

Buchenwald: January 1945
When Lulek and his nineteen-year-old brother, Naphtali, arrived in Buchenwald, Naphtali feared that he would not be able to save Lulek’s life as he had succeeded in doing so far.

The rules of the camp were ironclad, and chances were slim that they would allow a child of seven to stay with the men. But as usual, Naphtali did not give up. With the help of two friends, he wrapped me up in the feather quilt that Mother had supplied us with, and put me inside the sack he had carried with him ever since we had parted from her. As I was already used to transitions, to entering and exiting labor camps, he had no need to warn me to keep my mouth shut until it was safe to leave the sack. Despite my being so young, the procedure was clear to me. Like a rabbit, I jumped into the sack, curling up as small as possible, and that is how I entered Buchenwald with my brother. The Germans made the newly-arrived Jews stand in formation, arranging them in threes. From inside the sack, I heard the familiar commotion: the shouts of schnell, schnell—hurry, hurry—the maikeh club beatings and the barking of the dogs. I hunched on top of Naphtali’s back, motionless as a block of ice. Then I felt Naphtali removing the sack from his back and putting it down at his feet. A strange, sharp smell reached my nose, one that I did not recognize. Later I learned that this was chlorine, which the Nazis used as a disinfectant.

The Germans placed us all into a large hall, where they began separating the inmates into groups. Controlling his growing fear, Naphtali studied what was going on around us. Very quickly he deciphered the method used in categorizing the inmates. The Nazis ordered the Jews to strip. Medical personnel inspected them and administered various inoculations. And then, to his horror, he discovered that the Germans threw all the Jews’ possessions—including the clothes they had removed—into the oven, where they were incinerated. In this manner, the Germans thought, they would prevent contamination by the Jews. Naphtali would also have to dispose of his sack of belongings. I’ll never forget his cry: “Lulek, hutch totai! Lulek, come here!” I peeked out in disbelief, suspecting I had not heard correctly. From the sack at my brother’s feet, I raised my head carefully and looked around. Previously, I had heard the voices and smelled the odors. But now I also saw the sights from which I had been spared.

The Germans waved the maikeh threateningly, their ferocious dogs barking and biting. Veteran Jewish prisoners shaved the new arrivals and disinfected them in a filthy chlorine bath. When I got out of the sack, one of the guards, also apparently a prisoner, noticed me. He approached Naphtali and asked him what a boy like me was doing in this place, which was meant for adult men. Naphtali looked into his eyes and explained that the child had neither a father nor a mother. “What was I to do?” he asked. “Leave him outside in the snow, by himself?”

That guard gave us the first authorized proof of the methods of killing in the camp. In this place, he explained to Naphtali, there are no gas chambers, but there is a crematorium. “From that furnace,” he said, glancing toward it, “smoke billows twenty-four hours a day. All the muselmen, those walking, robot-like skeletons, die there. Everyone who comes to this camp becomes a muselman,” he said. “It doesn’t matter if he’s five or fifteen, seven or thirteen. But,” added the prisoner-guard, “you should know that if this child can get to block number eight, he will be okay.” When he finished what he had to say, he turned his back on us, as if he had not seen a thing.

As he walked away, a German guard caught sight of me. Naphtali was terrified when he saw the German focus on me, and even more so when he asked, as the other guard did, what I was doing there. Accustomed by now to being in mortal danger, Naphtali took off his shoe and folded it in half, removing Father’s gold watch from the sole. It was the last remaining item from the treasures Mother had given us for emergencies. Naphtali threw the expensive watch at the guard, who bent down as if to tie his shoelace, and picked up the watch. Then he continued his patrol, ignoring the two of us.

Other guards took me along with the entire group to block fifty-two. The sight before our eyes was horrifying. Thousands of people inhabited that crowded place, most of them muselmen, suffering from hunger and disease. People relieved themselves inside the block, and the stench was insufferable. Each morning the guards removed about forty corpses, the bodies of those who did not awaken.

Liberation: April 1945

Thanks to Naphtali and to a Russian inmate protector, Lulek survives the horrors of Buchenwald. When Buchenwald is liberated by American army forces, Lulek is discovered by Army Chaplain Rabbi Hershel Schacter.

In full army uniform, Rabbi Schacter got down from his jeep and stood before the pile of bodies. Many of them were still bleeding. Suddenly he thought he saw a pair of eyes, wide open and alive. He panicked, and with a soldier’s instinct, he drew his pistol. Slowly, carefully, he began to circle the pile of bodies. Then—and this I recall clearly—he bumped into me, a little boy, staring at him from behind the mound of corpses, wide-eyed. His face revealed his astonishment: in the midst of the killing fields, from within that sea of blood—suddenly, a child appears! I did not move. But he knew that no child in this place could be anything but Jewish. He holstered his pistol, then grabbed me with both hands and caught me in a fatherly embrace, lifting me in his arms. In Yiddish, with a heavy American accent, he asked me: “Wie alt bist du, mein kindt? How old are you, my boy?” 

I saw tears dripping from his eyes. Still, through force of habit, I answered cautiously, like someone perpetually on guard: “What difference does it make? At any rate, I’m older than you.” He smiled at me from behind his tears, and asked, “Why do you think that you’re older than I am?” Without hesitating, I replied, “Because you laugh and cry like a child, and I haven’t laughed for a long time. I can’t even cry anymore. So which one of us is older?”

Then he introduced himself to me, and the tension subsided. Rabbi Schacter asked who I was. “Lulek from Piotrkow,” I replied.

“And who is your family?” he inquired.

“My father was the rabbi of Piotrkow.”

“And you’re here all alone, without your father?”

“Without my father, without my mother. But I have a brother. He collapsed and is lying sick, here in the camp.”

Rabbi Schacter gained my full trust when he told me he had heard of my father. He had also heard of Father’s cousin, Rabbi Meir Shapira, the rabbi of Lublin, who had initiated the Daf Hayomi daily page program of Talmud study. I was thrilled.

Then the American rabbi took me by the hand, and together, we made the rounds of the bunkers, announcing the liberation. I remember the people lying inside the bunkers, with blank stares. They did not even have the strength to get up from their beds. “Jews, you are liberated!” called out the American rabbi in Yiddish. The inmates gazed at him, incredulous, as if to ask, “Who is this crazy meshiggener standing here in uniform, screaming in Yiddish?” 

At the Rebbe’s Tisch: 1950

After the war, Lulek makes his way to Eretz Yisrael and begins his schooling. Just after his Bar Mitzvah, he enters Kol Torah Yeshiva in Jerusalem. After his first Shabbat dinner there, his yeshivah schoolmates invite him to the tisch of the Rebbe of Gur. He has no idea what is in store for him—he finds the Chassidic customs and clothing strange. Even more puzzling, he discovers that the Rebbe recognizes him at once.

Then I understood the reason for the human wave flowing through the hall: the Rebbe had entered, hands clasped behind his back like a general. As soon as he walked in, the crowd parted like the Red Sea, allowing him to pass. As he walked by me, he looked at me, and his gaze was unique and unforgettable, riveting. In all my life, I merited only two such looks—one from the Rebbe of Gur, and the other twenty-four years later, from the Lubavitcher Rebbe. Throughout those twenty-four years, I never met another person with a look as penetrating as that of the Rebbe of Gur. And there I was, this young boy in short pants with a beret on my head, standing out in this crowd of Chassidic men all wearing black silk robes with sashes and high fur hats. The Rebbe passed through the throng, his eyes surveying each individual, registering exactly who was present. In seconds, the order was transmitted to add me to the list. To my complete surprise, I heard my name called out along with the others: “Srul Mayer, son of the rabbi of Piotrkow.” I did not respond. No one had ever called me Mayer. It had been five years since I had made aliyah, and I had always been known as Yisrael or Israel Lau. Occasionally, some people called me Lulek, but “Srul Mayer”? This Yiddishism was completely foreign to my ears. I did not think they were referring to me, but the words “son of the rabbi of Piotrkow” echoed in my ears, and I told myself there could be no other. He couldn’t mean my brothers since Naphtali was working in Paris, and Shiko, my newly-found half brother, was in Tel Aviv. Still, I did not dare make my way to the Rebbe’s table. 

A few minutes later, Yehoshua Kleinlehrer, my friend from Kol Torah who had accompanied me to the tisch, came up to me. His voice shaking, he said that in case I hadn’t heard, they had called my name. I shared my astonishment with him: Why were they calling my name? I had no answer, but he insisted that indeed, my name was the one they had called and I was the one they meant. He said I must go up to the Rebbe’s table. Embarrassed and confused, I asked him what I should do. Yehoshua explained the details calmly and clearly. “You see those steps where the gabbai is standing? Go up those three steps and look toward the table where the Rebbe is sitting. They’ll give you a small cup of wine in one hand and a slice of apple in the other. You say lechaim, directing yourself at the Rebbe, and the Rebbe will answer you, lechaim. It’s a very great honor. You’ve been chosen out of hundreds in this room.” As I listened to him, I felt weak in the knees. Of all the hundreds of people crowded into that suffocating room, I thought to myself, I know only three. So how is that I have been chosen, and I am the one who has been given this great honor that Kleinlehrer is describing? I realized I had no choice but to respond to the call.

As instructed, I went up the three steps. Someone gave me a wine cup and filled it halfway, and a slice of apple appeared in my other hand. Then the Rebbe in all his glory directed his penetrating gaze toward me. High fur hat perched on his head, surrounded left and right by his elderly disciples, he nodded his head up and down and toasted, “Lechaim.”

Meeting the Rebbe 

The young yeshivah bochur is again taken to meet the Rebbe of Gur, this time for a short conversation.

The door opened and someone led me into the room. I saw the Rebbe pacing back and forth like a caged lion, his gaze fixed on the ground. In his left hand, he held a pinch of tobacco, which he occasionally brought to his nose and sniffed. With his right hand, he lifted his high velvet kippah and fanned his head, cooling himself from the late-summer heat. I stood by the door, but he did not even glance at me. I thought to myself that perhaps they had brought me in by mistake, and that he had not meant to invite me. As these thoughts raced through my head, the Rebbe stopped and stared at me and my outfit with his penetrating gaze. He asked in Yiddish: “Who lent you those clothes?” “Simcha Eidelman,” I answered. He smiled warmly, then added, “I am used to seeing your brother Naphtali here more often than I see you. What is your uncle, Rabbi Vogelman, up to these days?” With one question, the Rebbe of Gur covered my entire world: Naphtali, my brother and protector, and Rabbi Vogelman, my uncle and foster father. This man to whom I had never spoken, who was responsible for tens of thousands of followers, knew exactly who the central individuals in my life were. I kept my answers concise and to the point, following the accepted conversational style of a Gur Chassid. 

The Rebbe continued, “You were probably surprised to be called up at the tisch. I remember when your brother Naphtali came to visit my father, the Imrei Emes, five years ago. At the tisch, I passed through the rows in the hall and all of a sudden, I saw you. It was impossible not to notice you. You look very much like your brother Naphtali. I remember the name your father gave you at your circumcision ceremony in the Piotrkow synagogue. He said he was naming you Israel, after his rabbi, the rabbi of Chortakov, Rabbi Israel Friedman, and also after his father-in-law from his first marriage, Rabbi Israel Hager, the rabbi of Vizhnitz, called the Ahavat Israel. Then he said he was also naming you Meir, after his cousin, Rabbi Meir Shapira of Lublin, who had no children. And, he added, he was naming you Israel Meir after the Chafetz Chaim, Rabbi Israel Meir of Radin. He had deep familial and spiritual ties with all four of those great men. The rabbi of Chortakov, the rabbi of Lublin and the Chafetz Chaim died within three months of each other, although the youngest was forty-six and the oldest ninety-four. As your father held you in his arms, he prayed to the Master of the Universe that a spark—I remember the exact word in Yiddish, a finek—from each of those souls would enter the soul of his child.

Like an animal with an acute survival instinct, I understood that I had to keep quiet until the fury subsided, and I had no intention of behaving like a small child in our hideout.

I never forgot his words. When I saw you among the crowd on Shabbat eve, I realized that you were the brother of Naphtuli (that’s what the Rebbe called him, with a Yiddish accent), and I remembered your name, after all this time since your circumcision.” Again he transfixed me with his penetrating stare. Then he gave me an apple and said, “I hope to see you here more often.” I nodded, realizing that coming from him, such a pronouncement meant a serious obligation on my part.

Israeli Chief Rabbi Meets Egyptian Chiefs: 1997

As chief rabbi, Rabbi Lau represented the State of Israel in countless meetings with world leaders. In 1997, he traveled to Cairo to meet with Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak. At the president’s request, he also visited the grand mufti of Egypt, Dr. Mohammed Tantawi, also known as Sheik Al Azhar, Egypt’s most senior religious representative. In their discussion, the sheik challenged the status of Jerusalem and Rabbi Lau took up the gauntlet. This is only one example of how, as chief rabbi, Rabbi Lau used his role to defend the State of Israel as the Jewish homeland.

Then I asked, out of politeness, if he would be willing to pay me a visit in Jerusalem. I promised to receive him with the same degree of respect that he had shown us, but his answer was abrupt: “Only if my passport is stamped with the seal of a Palestinian state. I will not have my passport stamped with the seal of the State of Israel.” I was unwilling to let this extremist view pass, and I pressed him. “Here we have been talking about friendship and good neighborliness, so why does the stamp bother you? My passport has the Egyptian stamp, and I am proud to have visited President Hosni Mubarak. Every attempt to advance peace and understanding between us is welcome.”

But Sheik Al Azhar did not change his position. In his eyes, the Israelis had stolen Jerusalem from the Muslims. I could not allow such a statement to go unchallenged. “I have done a little ‘homework’ on you,” I admitted. “I know you have a doctorate, and I was curious about the topic of your dissertation. I found out that you wrote about Jews and Judaism in the Koran. So I conclude that not only do you know Islam, but you know about Judaism as well. I also know something about Judaism, but I don’t know anything about Islam. So please permit me to ask, how many times does Jerusalem appear in the Koran? After all, we’re talking about the holy city, Al Kuds. Islam’s fundamental text must surely make mention of such a holy city,” I said. The sheik gave me a long, silent look. I continued to press my point: “In our Bible, the word ‘Jerusalem,’ and its synonym ‘Zion’ appear not just once or twice, but 821 times. This proves the centrality of Jerusalem in the Jewish faith and consciousness.

“So tell me,” I repeated my question. “How many times does the word Jerusalem appear in the Koran?” Again the sheik held his tongue. “I can make a guess,” I said, and he looked at me in silence. “Is the answer zero?” I asked. Zafzaf, his deputy, nodded his head. With that unforgettable affirmation, I left for the synagogue to recite the afternoon and evening services with the tiny Jewish community of Cairo. I had the feeling that despite Israel’s official peace with Egypt, we had a long way to go to achieve a stable and lasting peace, because some people, parties and movements still refused to accept the existence of the State of Israel as a fact.

After my return to Israel, Ariel Sharon told me that an Oman newspaper had published a political cartoon lampooning this meeting. It depicted two pigs, one wearing the Islamic crescent and the other, a Star of David. The caption underneath read: “Sheik Al Azhar meets with Hakham Akhbar [great sage] Lau.” The news reached Mubarak. In fury over this blow to the sheik’s honor, he issued a new law requiring citizens of Oman to apply for visas in order to visit Egypt.

Our Response to the Holocaust
Rabbi Lau often emphasizes that the “revenge” for the Holocaust is in the rebuilding of Jewish families and Jewish life. He himself sets an example.

My oldest son, Moshe Chaim, became a Bar Mitzvah on the Shabbat when we read the Biblical account of the Israelites’ battle with Amalek. I spoke about the last verse in the chapter: “The Lord maintains a war against Amalek, from generation to generation” (Exodus 17:16). We cannot fight the enemy Amalek, the nation or the phenomenon, with weapons or with ammunition. Rather, we are obligated to fight this battle in every generation, each generation passing on our heritage to the next. The struggle for the continuity of generations is the true battle and the great spiritual-Divine victory of Israel against the adversary Amalek. Our victory in the war against Amalek is that my son, Moshe Chaim Lau, is continuing the heritage of his grandfather, my father, Rabbi Moshe Chaim Lau, who went up to Heaven in a tempest.

Our son Moshe Chaim is the first candle in the private Chanukah menorah I have been privileged to create. My wife is the base of that menorah, from which the candles, our eight children, went out into the world. And I am the shamash, whose role is to help light those candles so that they will spread their light and proclaim, each in a special way, the miracle of the victory of eternal Israel.

[Jewish Action 2007]

Harotzeh Bi'tshuva

Why is this the only bracha in Shmoneh Esrei that says that Hashem wants it? Doesn't Hashem "want" refuah, parnassa and geulah [for example] as well??

Monday, November 26, 2018

Why "And"?

Why does the bracha of ולמלשינים start with a "ו"??

Links

Part three and part four on gilui arayos. Pil-ei Plaos BS"D! 

Mechiras Yosef in halacha, part one and two. As you have never heard it before!

A shiur from a series on the Chofetz Chaim on the Torah from my beloved friend HaRav Yonatan Freedman Shlita. Listen each week!!! A huuuuge mazel tov to Rav Freedman and his wife on the birth of their daughter Gila Adi!! Much nachas. 

The Rebbe And Viktor Frankl



I arrived in Vienna – together with my wife, Edla – in 1981, to serve as Chabad-Lubavitch emissaries in Austria. We immediately started serving the local Jewish community by arranging Torah classes for children, programs for adults and youth, and the like.

We were aware that the famous Dr. Viktor Frankl resided in the city, but as he never associated with the Jewish community in Vienna, we did not have the opportunity to make his acquaintance. He certainly never stepped foot in the Chabad center we established.

How surprised we were when Dr. Frankl responded with a contribution to our annual appeal, which we sent out to all the local Jews along with a Jewish calendar in honor of the upcoming High Holidays. He continued this practice every year thereafter—I never met him or spoke to him, but his donation always came.

About Dr. Frankl

Dr. Viktor Frankl (1905-1997), a Viennese psychotherapist, spent three long years in Hitler’s concentration camps – and lost his parents, brother, and pregnant wife to the “Final Solution” – but did not lose his vision of human dignity.

In the first half of his best-selling book, “Man’s Search for Meaning,” he describes his harrowing experience in the camps and considers how it was that some of the inmates seemed to be able to transcend their surroundings. He writes: “We who lived in concentration camps can remember the men who walked through the huts comforting others, giving away their last piece of bread . . . they offer sufficient proof that everything can be taken from a man but one thing: the last of the human freedoms—to choose one’s attitude in any given set of circumstances, to choose one’s own way.”

He concludes that even in the most severe suffering, the human being can find meaning and thus hope. In his words, “Those who have a ‘why’ to live, can bear with almost any ‘how.’”

After the war, Frankl returned to Vienna, where he developed and lectured about his own approach to psychological healing. He believed that people are primarily driven by a “striving to find meaning in one’s life,” and that it is this sense of meaning that enables us to overcome painful experiences. In the second half of his book, Frankl outlines the form of psychotherapy that he developed based on these beliefs, called logotherapy—the treatment of emotional pain by helping people find meaning in their lives.

More about Viktor Frankl, and the impact he had in the area of mental health, later in this article.

We did not understand, until one day in 1995 when all became clear. It started with a visit I received from a youthful, energetic 85-year-old woman, who introduced herself as Marguerite Chajes.

"Perhaps you think you are the first emissary of the Lubavitcher Rebbe to Vienna," Marguerite told me, "but that is not entirely the case. You see, I performed an important mission here on the Rebbe's behalf long before you arrived in Austria."
Marguerite Chajes

Her mother's maiden name was Hager. The Hagers were no ordinary Jewish family but relatives of the Rebbes of the famed Vishnitz chassidic dynasty. Marguerite was born in Chernowitz, but spent her childhood in Vienna. Marguerite became an opera singer; she married and had a daughter.

Just a few days before World War II, friends helped her escape, together with her husband and daughter, across the border to Italy, where they made it onto on the last boat to the US. Marguerite and her family settled in Detroit. Unfortunately, the rest of her family remained behind and perished.

Years passed. Marguerite's daughter grew up and married a doctor, who, in 1959, was honored at the dinner of a Chabad institution. In conjunction with that occasion, Marguerite had an audience with the Lubavitcher Rebbe, Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson, of righteous memory.

"I cannot explain why," Marguerite said, "but while in the Rebbe's room I suddenly broke down in tears. I felt that it was fine to cry. The dam holding back my river of tears gave way. Like many Holocaust survivors, I had never cried before. If I were to start crying, I felt that I might never stop... I always felt that I have to keep my emotions in check in order to be able to function as a human being."

Marguerite told the Rebbe her entire life story. But more than that, a special relationship was born that night in the Rebbe's room in Brooklyn. Marguerite left that audience feeling that she had been given a second father.
A Favor for the Rebbe

Marguerite had also mentioned to the Rebbe that for some time now she had had a yearning to go back and visit her native land. The Rebbe requested that in the event that she would make such a trip, she should come see him again beforehand. Not much thereafter, Marguerite scheduled a trip to Vienna, and, of course, first came to the Rebbe to inform him of her plan.

The Rebbe wanted her to visit two people in Vienna on his behalf. One of them was Dr. Viktor Frankl. How surprised Marguerite was when the Rebbe asked her if she could do for him a favor. The Rebbe wanted her to visit two people in Vienna on his behalf. One of them was Dr. Viktor Frankl, who headed the Vienna Policlinic of Neurology.

"Please send Dr. Frankl my regards. And pass the following message on to him: that I said that he should be strong and continue his work, with complete resolve. No matter what, he should not give up. If he remains strong and committed, he will certainly prevail."

Arranging a meeting with Frankl was no simple task. Arriving at the clinic, she was told that the professor hadn't shown up in two weeks. With effort, though, Marguerite found Frankl's home address and made her way there. Marguerite knocked on the door, and it was opened by a woman. The first thing she caught sight of in the home was a cross, hanging prominently on the wall. (In 1947 Frankl married his second wife, Eleonore Katharina Schwindt, a devout Catholic.) Taken aback, and already wondering whether this was a mistake, if perhaps this wasn't the person the Rebbe had wanted her to visit, she nevertheless asked whether there was a Herr Professor Frankl in the house.

Marguerite was asked to wait. Minutes later, a slightly annoyed-looking and apparently uninterested Dr. Frankl appeared. Marguerite, feeling very self-conscious, told him that she had regards for him "from Rabbi Schneerson of Brooklyn, New York."

Marguerite steeled herself and continued: "Rabbi Schneerson, known as the Lubavitcher Rebbe, sent a message for you: Remain strong! Continue your work with complete resolve. Don't give up. Ultimately you will prevail."

The hitherto apathetic doctor suddenly transformed before a shocked Marguerite's eyes. Tears filled his eyes. After composing himself somewhat he thanked Marguerite, and in the course of the ensuing conversation he told her that he had been planning to abandon his efforts to fight on behalf of his theory and philosophy, and actually was considering departing Vienna—but now he would reconsider...

"So Rabbi Biderman," Marguerite concluded, "now you understand what I meant when I said that I served as the Rebbe's emissary to Vienna way before you arrived!"
The Other Side of the Story

All around Frankl were loyal Freudian scholars. He was taunted, and his lectures were shunned Marguerite's story fascinated me. What had the Rebbe's message meant to Viktor Frankl?

What I had not known beforehand, but what Marguerite now explained, is that Frankl had not always been lauded and respected, as he is today. In his youth, Frankl had been a young colleague of Sigmund Freud and Alfred Adler. But his beliefs challenged their teachings. Whereas the dominant view at the time was that people are driven by the need to gratify physical needs, a "will to pleasure," he saw humankind differently. In Frankl's view, we are unique beings, driven by a "will to meaning," possessing free choice and the capacity for self-transcendence. "Between stimulus and response . . . is our power to choose our response. In our response lies our growth and our freedom."

Frankl had begun to develop these radical ideas before the war and during his time in the Nazi death camps, seeing how some prisoners were able to eke out a sense of purpose and maintain a positive outlook even there, he had solidified them. Now he found himself a lone dissenter. All around him were loyal Freudian scholars. He was taunted, and his lectures were shunned.

Understandably, Frankl experienced incredible emotional turmoil. The pressures were so great that he decided to simply give up. He decided to move to Australia, to join his sister who lived there. He was emotionally spent, and understandably dejected at the prospect of his life's work going to waste.

When Margaret Chajes arrived at Frankl's home, she told me, he had been sitting and drafting his immigration papers. She brought him a message from a Rebbe, a young chassidic master from overseas he'd never heard of before. "Don't give up," she told him. "You will prevail."

Frankl was beyond astonished. How in the world did this Rebbe know about his situation? And why should this chassidic rebbe care about him or the perpetuation of his philosophy?

It was exactly the shot in the arm that Frankl needed, and the timing could not have been better. It was exactly the shot in the arm that Frankl needed, and the timing could not have been better. Instead of joining his sister in Australia, he continued his practice as a psychiatrist and went back to his work, full of renewed motivation, vigor, and optimism.
A Corroborating Conversation

Marguerite's story certainly explained the annual contribution that Frankl would send to support the Rebbe's institutions in Vienna. And hearing the story stirred me to contact Dr. Frankl himself, thinking perhaps he'd have something to add.

A few days later, I called Frankl and asked to meet him

But it was difficult for him to meet me in person. This was 1995, you must understand, and Viktor Frankl was 90 years of age. So we spoke over the phone. "Do you remember Marguerite Chajes?" I asked. Naturally he did; she had become a friend of the family.

Throughout this short conversation, however, Frankl sounded impatient.

"Do you remember a regards she gave you from Rabbi Schneerson in Brooklyn?" I asked him.

A change in his demeanor. Now Frankl responded warmly: "Ah... of course! Can I ever forget it? The Rabbi came to my aid during a very difficult time in my life. I owe him a tremendous debt of gratitude!"
The Pursuit of Meaning Comes into Vogue

What, indeed, was the result of Marguerite's mission?

Well, it was soon after that, in 1959, that Frankl's book, "Man's Search for Meaning", was translated into English (at first it was translated under a different title), became a bestseller and classic psychiatric text, and propelled him into the international limelight. Frankl became a guest lecturer at universities on five continents. He received honorary doctorates from universities around the world, and national and international awards and medals for his pivotal work in psychotherapy. Before his death in 1997, his magnum opus had been translated into dozens of languages and sold millions of copies.

So many millions of people benefited – directly or indirectly – from the Rebbe's communiqué to Dr. Frankl. His brand of therapy inspired thousands of other books, seminars, workshops, new-age and spiritual groups, all based on Frankl's idea of the human being's unique ability to make choices and pursue his own meaning. From Scot Peck's "Road Less Traveled" to Steven Covey's "Seven Habits," and hundreds of other bestsellers during the last 30 years, all are variations of Viktor Frankl's perspective.

So many millions of people benefited – directly or indirectly – from the Rebbe's communiqué to Dr. Frankl. I sometimes shudder when I imagine what would have occurred if not for that perfectly-timed message.

In a letter dated June 19, 1969 (3rd Tammuz, 5729), the Rebbe writes (free translation):

…I would like to take this opportunity to add another point, that the medical condition of ..... proves (if proof is needed in this area) the awesome power of faith – especially when applied and expressed in practical action, community work, observance of mitzvot, etc. – to fortify a person’s emotional tranquility [and to affect the] minimizing and even elimination of inner conflicts, as well as complaints one may have to his surroundings, etc.

This is in spite the theory that faith and religion demand the discipline to restrain and suppress natural instincts and drives, and is, therefore, generally undesirable, and particularly in the case of a person who requires treatment for emotional issues.

I particularly took interest in the writing of Dr. Frankl (from Vienna) in this matter. To my surprise, however, his approach has apparently not been appropriately disseminated and appreciated. Although one can find numerous reasons as to why his ideas are not widely accepted – including the fact that [such treatment] is related to the personal lifestyle exemplified by the treating doctor – nevertheless, the question [as to why it is not appreciated] still remains…
More Details Come to Light

Haddon Klingberg, author of When Life Calls Out To Us: the love and lifework of Viktor and Elly Frankl, the only authorized biography of Viktor and Eleonore ("Elly"), writes:

"...after his death I asked Elly if he actually made these prayers every day. 'Absolutely. He never missed a day. Every morning for more than fifty years. But nobody knew this.' As they traveled the globe Viktor took the phylacteries with them, and everywhere, every morning, he prayed. He uttered memorized words of Jewish prayers and Psalms...

"(After Viktor died I saw his phylacteries for the first time. Elly had placed them in the little cubicle with his few simple possessions...)"

Indeed, Frankl's non-Jewish son-in-law confirmed this fact to me: "My father-in-law would close himself off in a room every day for a little while. Once I opened the door and saw him with black boxes on his head and hand. He was annoyed about my intruding on his privacy. When he was taken to the hospital, however, his practice of putting on tefillin became public."

I've often wondered why the Rebbe took an interest in the success of Viktor Frankl. I've often wondered why the Rebbe took an interest in the success of Viktor Frankl, a secular and intermarried Jew, and sought him out to offer encouragement and support. It would seem that the Rebbe did this not only out of personal concern for Frankl's welfare, but also in order to advance a philosophy which he felt ultimately fosters belief in G‑d, a spiritual perspective, and good values. The fact that this constitutes the real cure to a suffering soul is something the Rebbe repeatedly taught us.

I can't help but marvel over the Rebbe's wide reach, broad-mindedness, and remarkably visionary approach.

Talk To Yourself

Rabbi Tzvi Hersh Weinreb

I didn’t consider myself a Lubavitcher, but I lived in Crown Heights for a short time after I got married. I would attend the Rebbe’s farbrengens from time to time, but my relationship was always from a distance.

I mention this because of what happened later on.

Three years after we married, my wife and I moved away to Silver Spring, Maryland, where I attended the University of Maryland. I received a PhD in psychology and began working as a psychologist in the local school system. Besides this, I used to give classes in Talmud—one on Shabbos afternoon for the general public, and one on Tuesday night for a smaller group who wanted to learn on a deeper level.

I was in my early thirties, so I suppose I was too young for a midlife crisis—or maybe I arrived at a midlife crisis earlier than most people—but around this time, I was torn with a number of very pressing questions:

Should I stay in Torah learning, or should I continue in psychology? And if so, how should I further my career? Should I move into private psychotherapy work or accept an offer from one of the county social service organizations in the area? Also, I wasn’t sure what was best for my children in terms of educational options in Silver Spring.

In addition to all these dilemmas, like everybody else I guess, I had my own questions of faith and trust in G‑d, as well as some philosophical questions. I was in a state of uncertainty.

I had my own questions of faith and trust in G‑d . . . I was in a state of uncertainty.

All these questions had me depressed, and I was unsure what to do or where to go. I spoke to various close friends, and one of them—a Chabad chassid—suggested that I visit the Rebbe.

And so it was that in February of 1971 I called the Rebbe.

The Rebbe’s secretary answered the phone in English, with a simple “Hello, who’s this?”

Now, as I was talking to the secretary, in the background—I recognized his voice from the farbrengens I had attended—the Rebbe was asking in Yiddish, “Who’s calling?”

I replied, “A yid fun Maryland” (“A Jew from Maryland”).

I told the secretary that I have many questions which I would like to discuss with the Rebbe—questions about what direction my life should take, questions regarding my career, questions of faith… I explained that I was at a very uncertain stage in my life and I didn’t know where to turn.

I spoke in English and, as I was talking, the Rebbe’s secretary was repeating and paraphrasing my words in Yiddish—I imagine he was doing this so that the Rebbe should hear.

And then I heard the Rebbe say in the background, in Yiddish: “Tell him that there is a Jew who lives in Maryland that he can speak to. Der yid hayst Veinreb—his name is Weinreb.”

The secretary asked me, “Did you hear what the Rebbe said?”

Now, I couldn’t believe my ears. I knew for sure I had not given the secretary my name, but the Rebbe had just said my name! I was taken aback, and I wanted to hear it again. So when the secretary asked whether I heard, I said no.


Rabbi Dr. Tzvi Hersh Weinreb being interviewed by JEM



The secretary repeated the Rebbe’s words to me: “S’iz doh a yid in Maryland mit vemen er zol redden. Zayn numen iz Veinreb.” (“There’s a Jew in Maryland whom he should talk to. His name is Weinreb.”)

So I replied, “But my name is Weinreb!”

And then I heard the Rebbe say, “Oib azoi, zol er visen zayn az amol darf men reden tzu zich.” (“If that’s the case, then he should know that, sometimes, one needs to speak to himself.”)

The secretary also seemed stunned by what was taking place. He just stopped, and I could hear his breathing. And then he said to me, “The Rebbe said that sometimes it’s best to talk to yourself. Isn’t your name Weinreb?”

“Yes, my name is Weinreb, but maybe the Rebbe means a different Weinreb.”

“No, the Rebbe’s saying, ‘Talk to Weinreb,’ and he explained that you must to talk to yourself.”

I thanked him very much, and the call ended with that.

I believe I understood what the Rebbe was trying to tell me. If I could put words in his mouth, he was saying, “You’re looking for answers outside yourself. You’re not a kid anymore; you’re a man. You are thirty years old, you are a father, you are a teacher of Torah. You have to have more self-confidence. It’s time to grow up and listen to yourself. Don’t be so dependent on others. Trust yourself.”

And from that point on, I became much more decisive. I think up to that time I had a tendency to be very ambivalent. I was not a risk-taker; I was a procrastinator when it came to making decisions. But from that point on, I became decisive.

That the Rebbe understood that, I think, was part of his great wisdom.

The Rebbe could have picked up the phone and told me what to do, but I wouldn’t necessarily have listened to what he told me, and I wouldn’t have accepted it in the same way I accepted this. Like many people, I suppose I had a natural resistance to being told by others what to do, and I think the Rebbe had insight to know that it was better if I heard the answer from myself than if I heard the answer from him.

That the Rebbe understood that, I think, was part of his great wisdom.

A few months after that life-changing phone call, there came an opportunity to express my gratitude to the Rebbe in person. I had come to visit my in-laws in Brooklyn, and my father-in-law encouraged me to go to the Rebbe to thank him. The Rebbe was blessing people in a small public audience, and I went over to him and said, “My name is Weinreb and I’m from Maryland.” And he gave me a big smile of recognition.

I saw the Rebbe many times, and I saw many pictures of him, but that particular smile meant a lot for me.

I left Silver Spring, and eventually I made a career change from being a full-time psychologist to becoming a rabbi of a synagogue. For many years I was the rabbi of Shomrei Emunah, a wonderful congregation in Baltimore. Later in life, I was offered to take over as the executive vice president of the Orthodox Union, a position I accepted, though it was a difficult decision to leave my Baltimore post.

Since 1971, there have been times when I faced difficult questions in life, and before I sought advice from anyone else, I would listen to my inner voice. I would set aside time to first study some of the Rebbe’s teachings—like Likkutei Sichot—in order to connect again, and then I’d follow the advice he gave me: to talk to myself. And I’ve encouraged other people to do the same.

Before you go asking this and that of another person, first talk to yourself and listen to what you have to say about it—sometimes your own advice is the best advice.

Please Daven

DOVID BEN LEAH DEVORAH who was injured in a car accident. 

Sunday, November 25, 2018

The Day The Rebbe Interviewed The Novelist





“NOW THAT YOU HAVE INTERVIEWED ME, I’D LIKE TO INTERVIEW YOU. UNLESS YOU HAVE ANY OBJECTIONS?” 

Harvey Swados (1920–1972) was a highly regarded American novelist and nonfiction writer, known for his naturalistic style. He is widely recognized for several works, among them Standing Fast and his classic, On the Line, a collection of stories set in an auto plant. Swados’s yechidus with the Rebbe took place in 1964; his wife, Bette, accompanied him. 

The Rebbe’s most striking physical characteristic, the one most often commented upon, particularly by those who met him in yechidus, were his eyes; in Swados’s case, he recalled how “the pale blue eyes remain fixed upon [me] with an unblinking directness that could be disconcerting.” Of course, Swados, himself a keen possessor of a fine novelist’s eye, noticed far more details about the Rebbe than just his eyes. After his yechidus, he peppered his recollection of his encounter with just the sorts of details that illuminate what it was like to meet Menachem Mendel Schneerson in private. Among the first things that struck Swados was the Rebbe’s workspace: “[His] office was as bleak as the rest of the dingy building, the bare venetian blinds drawn against the beating snow outside, the walls bare also, and with nothing on his desk but a pad and a telephone. The Rebbe sat very still, attending to my queries with his head bent forward so that his broad brimmed hat shaded his face, which appeared deceptively ruddy. He is a strikingly handsome man, whose almost classically regular features are not at all obscured by a graying beard which is full but not bushy.” 

Swados, then in his early forties, was on something of a quest, not searching for background material for a new book but seeking truths that he could incorporate into his own life.

… Three years earlier, Israel had publicly tried Adolf Eichmann, the Nazi official in charge of the Jews’ annihilation. Filled with detailed testimony from survivors, the Eichmann trial had turned into a seminal event in Jewish life, fully acquainting Jews and interested non-Jews with what Jews had    experienced inside the Nazi ghettos and inside the work camps and death camps. In the aftermath of the trial, Hannah Arendt, the well-known political philosopher who had covered the trial for the New Yorker, published a book of her reflections on the trial, titled Eichmann in Jerusalem: A Report on the Banality of Evil. In it, Arendt leveled charges against the European Jewish leadership, accusing the local Judenraete (the Jewish councils appointed by the Nazis to be their liaisons to the Jewish community) of having acquiesced to the Nazis’ most terrible demands. When the Nazis ordered the Judenraete to supply Jews for deportation, they did so, fearing that if they didn’t cooperate, the Germans would murder even more Jews. Now, Swados began his discussion by asking the Rebbe his opinion of the behavior of the Judenraete and of the German masses as well. The Rebbe’s animus toward the Germany of the Hitler era was well-known and of course not surprising.... He pointed to political realities, to the incredible difficulties in maintaining one’s faith under a totalitarian regime.” The Rebbe started speaking about the persecution then being undergone by Jews in the Soviet Union and asked rhetorically, “How much more difficult do you suppose it was to keep hold of one’s integrity under the crushing weight of the German tyrants, who were so much more efficient than the Russians? No,” he said firmly, “the miracle was that there was any resistance at all, that there was any organization at all, that there was any leadership at all.” This sort of sober political analysis was clearly not the direction Swados had expected his conversation with a Chasidic Rebbe to take. Was it the Rebbe’s opinion, therefore, Swados found himself asking, that the tragedy was not a unique      visitation upon the Jewish people and that it could happen again? “Morgen in der fruh,” the Rebbe replied without hesitation, “Tomorrow morning.” This was a particularly disconcerting statement from the Rebbe because of his long-standing belief that the Holocaust would never repeat itself. However, that latter belief was always expressed in a theological context. The Rebbe was convinced that God would never again allow such an attack against the Jewish people. But as his conversation with Swados was not about theology, but rather about history and human nature, the Rebbe was making more of a commonsense observation. According to the Rebbe, a society that does not inculcate in its citizens belief in a God who demands righteous and moral behavior could, if it has the military might to do so, carry out genocide against any ethnic group.


“Why [are you] so certain that so terrible a horror could occur again?” Swados asked the Rebbe. Swados reported what happened next: “The Rebbe launched into an analysis of the German atrocities in a rhetoric that shifted eloquently and unswervingly, often in the same sentence, from English (for my benefit) to Yiddish (for nuance and precision). He did not speak mystically, nor did he harp on the German national character and its supposed affinity for Jew-hatred. “Rather, he insisted upon the Germans’ obedience to authority and their unquestioning carrying out of orders—even the most bestial—as a cultural-historical phenomenon that was the product of many generations of deliberate inculcation.” The conversation continued a few minutes longer, then Swados, conscious of how many people were waiting outside to see the Rebbe, started to prepare for the meeting’s end. He thanked the Rebbe and half rose to leave, when the Rebbe restrained him with a motion of his hand. 

“Now that you have interviewed me, I’d like to interview you. Unless you have any objections?” “Please,” Swados said, “go right ahead.” The Rebbe grinned. “But I am afraid that I won’t be as diplomatic with you as you have been with me.” As Swados later recalled: “After a few questions about my background, he asked me about the subject matter of my books. When I protested that it was no easy thing to sum up, in a sentence or two, books that had taken me years to write, he retorted, ‘Surely I can expect a better summation from you than from anyone else.’ He seemed particularly interested in my description of On the Line, a book in which I had attempted, by means of a series of fictional portraits of auto assembly workers, to demonstrate the impact of their work on their lives. “‘What conclusions did you come to?’ “The question nettled me. It struck me as obtuse, coming from a man of such subtle perception. “‘Did you suggest,’ he persisted, ‘that the unhappy workers, the exploited workers, the workers chained to their machines, should revolt?’ “‘Of course not. It would have been unrealistic.’ “‘What relation would you say that your book bears to the early work of Upton Sinclair?’ “I was flabbergasted. Here I was, sitting in the study of a scholar of mystic lore on a wintry night, and discussing not Chabad Hasidism . . . but proletarian literature! ‘Why,’ I said, ‘I would hope that it is less narrowly propagandistic than Sinclair’s. I was trying to capture a mood of frustration rather than one of revolution.’ “Suddenly, I realized that he had led me to the answer that he was seeking— and what was more, with his next query, I realized how many steps ahead he was of my faltering mind: ‘You could not conscientiously recommend revolution for your unhappy workers in a free country, or see it as a practical perspective for their readers. Then how could one demand it from those who were being crushed by the Nazis?’” The yechidus now shifted from the macro issue of the Holocaust and the repurcussions of totalitarianism to the micro, Swados’s own life. 

The Rebbe started by challenging the novelist to think in terms of his own obligations as a writer and a Jew: “After all, you have certain responsibilities which the ordinary man does not; your words affect not just your own family and friends but thousands of readers.” “I’m not sure what those responsibilities are,” Swados responded. “First, there is the responsibility to understand the past. . . . Suppose I ask how you explain the past, the survival of Judaism over three millennia.” “Well,” Swados answered, “the negative force of persecution has certainly driven people together who might otherwise disintegrate.” Swados went on to argue that if antisemitism disappeared, Jewishness might well be weakened or destroyed. To this the Rebbe responded: “Do you really think that only a negative force unites the little tailor in Melbourne and the Rothschild in Paris?” “I wouldn’t deny the positive aspects of Judaism.” The Rebbe jumped on Swados’s concession: “Then suppose that scientific inquiry and historical research led you to conclude that factors which you might regard as irrational have contributed to the continuity of Judaism. Wouldn’t you feel logically bound to acknowledge the power of the irrational, even though you declined to embrace it?” “Hypnotized by the elegance” of the Rebbe’s argument, as Swados put it, he assented. But the Rebbe was not finished with his challenge. “You must have a certain talent, a gift for expressing yourself so that thousands are swayed by what you write. Where does that talent come from?” “Partly from hard work. From practice, from study.” “Naturally. But is it unscientific to suggest that you might owe some of it to your forebears? You did not spring from nothing. The point is, isn’t it, that something has been transmitted to you by your father, your grandfather, your great-grandfather, down through the ages? And that you owe them a debt, a debt which you have the responsibility to try to repay.” By this point, Swados found himself sweating heavily, his hands tightly clenched, as were those of his wife. The Rebbe, however, sat relaxed, waiting for the writer’s response. “Are you suggesting, Rebbe,” Swados finally said, “that I should reexamine my writing or my personal code and my private life?” “Doesn’t one relate to the other? Doesn’t one imply the other?” “That’s a complicated question.” “Yes,” the Rebbe responded amiably, “it certainly is.” He paused, then reminded Swados of what he had said earlier. “I warned you that I wouldn’t be diplo- matic, didn’t I?” At the meeting’s end, when Swados thanked the Rebbe for being so generous with his time, the Rebbe waved aside the complimentary words. “We’ll see what your writing turns out like in the time ahead.” At first, Swados thought that the Rebbe might be referring to something that he would write about the meeting, but he immediately realized that that was wrong. “Few things could matter less to him. For he is a man quite without vanity, and what he was expressing was the hope that my work would go well, certainly better than before.” The Rebbe then extended a bracha (blessing) to the Swadoses and their children. Minutes later, standing outside in the howling snow, Swados found himself surrounded by Chasidim who wanted to know what had transpired in the hour- and-a-half-long meeting. The author, profoundly moved, did not want to try to sum up so intense a conversation in a few words, although he offered a few impressions. “Tell me,” demanded one Chasid, beaming at the realization of how taken Swados seemed to have been with the Rebbe, “what kind of impression did the Rebbe make on you? I know it’s cold, but just tell me in one word.” Swados surprised himself by his own definition of what had struck him most about the Rebbe, and it was not the intellectual rigor of the discussion or all the personal challenges posed by the Rebbe: “If I had to choose one word to characterize him, I guess I would choose the word ‘kindly'.

[The Life And Times Of Rabbi MM Schneerson] 

Who Is Responsible For Food Stamps?

In 1968, Shirley Chisholm became the first black woman elected to Congress. A powerful figure in her own right, Chisholm lacked the power to stop senior, and influential, southern Democratic congressmen, many of whom in those days were racists, from assigning her to the Agriculture 
Committee, an intentionally absurd appointment for a representative from Brooklyn. One New York newspaper headlined the affront: “A Tree Grows in Brooklyn?” 


Chisholm, who wanted to work on education and labor issues, was both frustrated and furious. She soon received a phone call from the office of one of her constituents. “The Lubavitcher Rebbe would like to meet with you.” Representative Chisholm came to 770. The Rebbe said, “I know you’re very upset.” Chisholm acknowledged both being upset and feeling insulted. “What should I do?” The Rebbe said: “What a blessing God has given you. This country has so much surplus food and there are so many hungry people and you can use this gift that God’s given you to feed hungry people. Find a creative way to do it.” 

A short time later, on her first day in Congress, Chisholm met Robert Dole, the Kansas congressman who had just been elected to the Senate; Dole spoke to Chisholm and expressed great concern regarding the plight of midwestern farmers who were producing more food than they could sell and were losing money on their crops. Working with Dole and on her own, in an effort that eventually benefited millions of poor people and farmers, Chisholm greatly expanded the food stamp program. In 1973, the Agriculture and Consumer Protection Act ordered that food stamps be made available “in every jurisdiction in the United States.” 

Chisholm played an even more critical role in the creation of the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC), which mandated food supplements for high-risk pregnant women and for young children at nutritional risk. Chisholm led the battle in the House, and Dole and Hubert Humphrey did so in the Senate; today some eight million people receive WIC bene- fits each month. David Luchins, a twenty-year veteran of New York senator Daniel Patrick Moyni- han’s staff, heard Chisholm relate the story of her meeting with the Rebbe and her work on behalf of food stamps and WIC at a 1983 retirement breakfast in her honor. As she said that morning, “A rabbi who is an optimist taught me that what you think is a challenge is a gift from God.” And, she then added, “If poor babies have milk and poor children have food, it’s because this rabbi in Crown Heights had vision.”

[The Life And Teachings Of Rabbi MM Schneerson p.13-15]