Many a man will ask why the observance of CB Shvat, a Yohrtzeit of a Rebbetzin? is she too one of the Rabbeyim that we observe her Yohrtzeit, visit her Tziyun, and learn the Mishnayes of her name? I too had trouble understanding it once upon a time, but I attribute that difficulty to my background and education.
Why her more than all others?
Many will say that it was her royal qualities and the way she conducted herself in her day-to-day life. The fact that she was hardly seen in public attributed to a mystique that has yet to reach its peak. With others it was the fact that with her passing the "golden days" of Lubavitch ended, with no farbrengens during the week, and no more Mamorim, save for a couple.
One thing is for certain; Lubavitch owes her a tremendous debt of gratitude, and is repaying that debt. Without her insistance who knows if the Rebbe would've accepted the Nesius, and the outcome of the Seforim court case might have been very different. There is so much we do not know about her support and help of the Rebbe in all matters.
There is no more appropriate way of repaying that debt than the current way.
I heard that after CB Shevat the Rebbe asked Rabbi Marlow if al pi Halacha he still had a shychus to the Frierdiker Rebbe is this true?
ReplyDeleteI'm not the source for these stories, but it would be suitable for the Rebbe, the consumate Ish Halochoh, to ask that Shayleh of a Rov.
ReplyDeleteואלה המשפטים ...ולא לפני עכו"ם
ReplyDeleteDid he/she ask a shaile on that too?
ahh, a very brave anonymous comment.
ReplyDeletecan we have a 'humble' answer?
ReplyDeleteyou wanna know if the Rebbe had a heter to go to court, is that the question?
ReplyDeleteto anon1: the shaylah you refer to was asked by the Rebbe but to Rabbi Piekarski.
ReplyDeleteto anon2: the hetter at that time was based on the fact that the nitva was not shomer tum"z and would either not have come before or not heeded the psak of a bes din.
Berl Gurari was not Shomer Torah at the time?
ReplyDeleteBut first things first;what was so difficult to call him to din torah?
After all for a Rebbe to go to court over 'material' matters without going to 'bais din' is a terrible precedent. Why not go to normal Torah'dige procedures.
שולחן ערוך חושן משפט סימן כו
סעיף א
א) אסור לדון בפני דייני עובדי כוכבים ב) ובערכאות שלהם (פי' מושב קבוע לשריהם לדון בו), ג) אפילו בדין שדנים בדיני ישראל, ואפילו נתרצו ב' בעלי דינים לדון בפניהם, אסור. וכל הבא לידון בפניהם, הרי זה רשע, א וכאילו חרף וגדף ד) והרים יד בתורת מרע"ה. הגה: ויש ביד בית דין לנדותו ולהחרימו עד שיסלק יד העובדי כוכבים מעל חבירו (מהרי"ק שורש קנ"ד). וכן היו מחרימין המחזיק ביד ההולך לפני עובדי כוכבים (ריב"ש סי' ק"ב). ואפילו אינו דן לפני עובדי כוכבים, ה) רק שכופהו על ידי עובדי כוכבים שיעמוד עמו לדין ישראל, ראוי למתחו על העמוד (מרדכי פ' הגוזל קמא). וע"ל סימן שפ"ח. מי שהלך בערכאות של עובדי כוכבים ונתחייב בדיניהם, ואחר כך חזר ותבעו לפני דייני ישראל, יש אומרים שאין נזקקין לו (מהרי"ק שורש קפ"ח /קפ"ז/); ויש אומרים דנזקקין לו (מרדכי בפ' הגוזל בתרא), אם לא [א] שגרם הפסד לבעל דינו לפני עובדי כוכבים (מהר"מ מירזברק). [ב] ו) והסברא ראשונה נראה לי עיקר.
סעיף ב
ב היתה יד עובדי כוכבים תקיפה, ובעל דינו אלם, ואינו יכול להציל ממנו בדייני ישראל, יתבענו לדייני ישראל תחלה; ז) אם לא רצה לבא, ח) נוטל רשות מבית דין ג [ג] ומציל בדייני עובד כוכבים מיד בעל דינו. הגה: ויש רשות לבית דין לילך לפני עובדי כוכבים ד ט) ולהעיד שזה חייב לזה (בה"ת בשם ר' שרירא). וכל זה דווקא כשאינו רוצה להיות ציית דין, אבל בלאו הכי אסור לבית דין להרשות לדון לפני עובדי כוכבים (מהרי"ק שורש א').
נתיבות המשפט חידושים סימן כו ס"ק ח
ReplyDelete(ח) נוטל רשות מבית דין ומציל. ועיין ביאורים סק"ג דדוקא שהבית דין יודעים שחייב על פי דין כגון שיש לו שטר וכיוצא בו, אבל אם אין הבית דין יודעים שחייב לו, כגון במלוה על פה, אין הבית דין נותנים לו רשות, רק לכפותו על ידי עכו"ם לדון לפני ישראל.
All I am saying 'aderabe' if there was a legitimate 'unavoidable' reason for this matter to have been settled in a goishe court, why in all these years haven't we seen the slightest halachic justification?
ReplyDeleteI think that the Rebbe asked R'Aizik Shvei z'l to write a psak.True, it would have been hard for a chosid to write a psak against the Rebbe, and an objective person would have been better.
ReplyDeleteTzig:'and the outcome of the Seforim court case might have been very different': Lubavitch makes a big deal and a yomtov about winning the case, but the honest truth is nothing would have changed had Lubavitch lost.The Jewish world has not changed one iota because of this 'gevins'
one more qoute
ReplyDeleteנתיבות המשפט חידושים סימן כו ס"ק ז
אם לא רצה לבוא. היינו שמבורר לנו ע"י שני עדים, דבהוצאת ממון בעינן [ שני עדים. או"ת [אורים סק"ז
Any record of Bais Din rulling that according to witnessq Berl refuse to come to din torah?
Can Yosef site a source that grants him or his ilk access to private piskei halocho or that anyone is in any way mechuyov to provide "halachic justifications" to him? Is there a Freedom of Information Act in the Shulchan Oruch that is missing from my addition? What an intolerable piece of human debris! Veain peitze peh umetzvavtzev!?
ReplyDeleteberl
ReplyDeleteand what about "vahayisem nekiyim"
in my opinion the Rebbe had everything to lose and nothing to gain by going to court. The judge could've not bought the whole vort of "the seforim belong to Chassidim", a BD would've accepted it much easier.
ReplyDeleteavremel said...
ReplyDeletein my opinion the Rebbe had everything to lose and nothing to gain by going to court. The judge could've not bought the whole vort of "the seforim belong to Chassidim", a BD would've accepted it much easier.
avremel look at this in this manner a judge issues his opinion a bais din says what the halacha is (heshem's opinion)
see my comments @ http://asimplejew.blogspot.com/2006/02/conversation-with-skverer-chassid.html
Berl,
ReplyDeleteDo you always call people who disagree with you horrible names?
I don't think you learned this from the Rebbe.You give Lubavitch a bad name.
the point of Yorshim does not belong here, because the claim was that the seforim were not in his personal posession. A BD would've accepted that claim easier than a court.
ReplyDeleteI see here that y'all are incapable of commenting on the subject of the post, which was the observance of 22 Shvat. Is there a reason for that?
ReplyDeleteberl wrote: >>Can Yosef site a source that grants him or his ilk access to private piskei halocho or that anyone is in any way mechuyov to provide "halachic justifications" to him? <<<
ReplyDeleteIt is very simple going to court for releif is the greatest chilul hashem in the shulchan aruch. It is the chiyuv of those who publically ignore this terrible injuction to justify their action, in order to minimize the chilul hashem.
After all it has been pointed out here and other places that nothing about yiddishkiet was at stake here. Any sefer or manuscript could be photo copied, and so on.
As far as a source here is it:
שו"ע סמ"ע ס"ק ח' ...בשם רב שרירא גאון דהמורד בדין מתרין בו התראה מפורסמת ואם אינו מקבל... וגובין ממנו בדייני עכו"ם
A "PUBLIC" warning has to be issued. In order to avoid a grave chillul hashem
If there is any 'public' record of warning Berl Gurari aderaabe lets see it.
Hirshel,
ReplyDeleteI think the 'thundering' silence about the issue at hand,chof beis shvat tells you that the 'oilem' is not interested .
I do see that the oylem is interested only in controversy that serves THEIR purpose, even though they SAY that they do not like re-hashed controversy like Chassidim vs. Misnagdim.
ReplyDeleteDoes that show us that people here are incapable of commenting on a non-controversial subject?
ר' הירשעל
ReplyDeleteאיך שטאם פון תלמידי הבעש"ט און מיין משפחה זענען דורי דורות חסידים מיום הוסדה
so don't pin this 'misnaged' thing on me.
Its one thing to write nice things about a tzadeikes. But it was you who wrote a 'shvach' on her behave having helped in the court case.
When this should be the last thing told about her.
Yosef
ReplyDeletewhere did I pin this Misnaged term to you? re-read the comment if you must.
whether or not they were allowed to go to court is irrelevant here. They did, and the Reb. helped in the proceedings by her deposition, that's all.
if they were not allowed al pi din to go to court is it a "shavac"?
ReplyDeletenow to the topic of the post why her more then others
ReplyDeletebecause now in chabad they make everthing with a shtrum.
The FR did as was done in chabad in his days and released a mamer in honer of his mothers yorhzite
now the style is not to be mosif blimud hachsidius just to talk about zien mosef hence the shtrum
so the answere to
Why her more than all others?
is they dont do more
just "tumle" more
I love The fact that the Rebbetzin is a role model for women since they are too rare in frum circles. The Rebbe was extremely supportive of women, he respected and admired women and always spoke about how important the avodah of women was for the world. The fact that Lubavitch has female role models inspires many women to become frum. The rest of the frum world is much more male dominated.
ReplyDeleteFor yener menuval that asked the question:
ReplyDeleteIt happans to be that they did try to call Barry to a Din Torah and obviously he paid no attention. As is clearly stated in SA in such a case you may than go to court.
Call me menuval...but name calling is not an answer. I cited the halacha that the summons has to be מפורסם
ReplyDeleteI have tried for years to find any source for your claim. Why do you think it is so difficult to find such a 'public' record?
If such a thing exsists why not make it public?
I mentioned to the local Rosh Hakollel this morning that "v'eile hamishpotim asher tosim lifneihem" doesn't seem to be followed nowadays, and he told me an interesting thought that he had:
ReplyDeleteThe problem in the past was that by going to their courts, you are elevating their gods; but now, in America, where law is a human endeavor, not based on religion, or pagan gods, the reason wouldn't apply.
fiendly
ReplyDeletemay I ask who this RHK is?
L'may nafka mina?
ReplyDeletewe'd like to know if he knows what he's talking about. Is it a Kolel Choshen Mishpat?
ReplyDeleteThe context was a casual conversation after shachris, prompted by your post, rather than a practical halachic question.
ReplyDeleteHe might just have wanted to be melamed zchus on klal yisrael.
As far as his credentials are concerned, even Schneur Zalmen Alpert holds him for a "gavra raba" (whatever that is worth :-))
"Friendly Anonoymous said...
ReplyDeleteI mentioned to the local Rosh Hakollel this morning that "v'eile hamishpotim asher tosim lifneihem" doesn't seem to be followed nowadays, and he told me an interesting thought that he had:
The problem in the past was that by going to their courts, you are elevating their gods; but now, in America, where law is a human endeavor, not based on religion, or pagan gods, the reason wouldn't apply".
I beg your parden,,,,
Pshetlach are good for a long shabbos afternoon, not for a most serious issue as this. I regret to say the main reason is that the Bet dinim today have not enough clout.
We are not disagreeing then as to the practical lack of application of the halacha, only as to its reason.
ReplyDeleteI prefer my pshetel to your cynicism
What a ferd,,,,
ReplyDelete"Only as to its reason", becuase of your reason it is agood thing, and that we should continue this way, because of the other reason we must fix teh problem.
Mid'chotzif kulei hay, shma mina....
ReplyDeleteWhy don't you post pictures of the rebbetzin at her chassunah with the nice short sleeve gown?
ReplyDeleteYou mean this?
ReplyDeleteclick on the pic, and see if this hater hasn't had his mind washed. That's what hate to Lubavitch does for you, it plays with your mind, and lies, lies, lies.
ReplyDeleteI mean the link to the pic posted at 11:09:28.
ReplyDeleteI'm honored you commented a month after the post.
ReplyDeletewhich gantzeh mayseh is bluff?
Gay dir fin dannet, not mich.
I mean to say that the correct way to say it is "gay dir" not "gay mich".
ReplyDelete1) Di vist zech mesten oyf ingarisheh iddish mitten syntax?
ReplyDelete2) Not to be honored tzigeleh. 'Chodir ersht geffinen.
3) Bloff: Udder doss udder yentz. Udder di mushel tzi di nimshel is bloff. [Habboh lilmoyd venimtzah lomeyd.
chnyok
פארוואס חזר'סטו איבער די זעלבע זאך נאכאמאל?
ReplyDeleteTo Hirshel tzig
ReplyDeleteI stumbled across the Lubavitch blog lines a few days ago, and was encouraged by the open expression of inquiry going on.
Then I post a few comments, and on another site האב איך באקומקן א מי שברך - so I decided that my messages are not clear enough for some readers. (See mentalblog)
Deribber I posted again, with numbers etc.
to Yosef 718
ReplyDeleteMost gedolim as Reb Fishele Hershkovits and Reb Menashe Klien were consulted on the matter, and I think that they know the Choshen Mishpot and the Nesivot, but they had derech eretz for the Geon Yisroel Ukdoshoi the Lubavitcher Rebbe, zya, but your animosity to the Rebbe and the FR is beyond beyond your rebbe Moshe Sherrer.
It always amazes me that one of your rebbes Reb Yoel of Satmar
went to the Zionist Begatz by the Tolchover shul in Tzfat that he had to save from the hands of his nephew his archnemesis the Klausenburger Rebbe,doesnt even get a bleep on your screen, Why? is it the wide brim of his that covered all his maasim tovim?