Thursday, May 13, 2010

ר' יהושע (היישקע) דובראווסקי ז"ל

איך האב היישקע'ן נישט געקענט, סיידן איר רעכנט דאס אז איך פלעג אים זעהן אין זיבן זיבנציג, אבער איך פלעג ליינען זיינע פערל ווערטער אין דער אלגעמיינער זשורנאל, פיל איך זיך ווי א שטיקל א באקאנטן זיינער. און אז א באקאנטן גייט אוועק פון דער וועלט מוז מען עפעס שרייבן דערוועגן און באקלאגן די אבידה עטוואס. אבער וואס? אז ער איז געווען א חסידישער איד? דאס ווייסן אלע. אז ער האט געהאט א גוטן פעדער? נו, ווייסט מען אויך. סתם איבערשרייבן דאס וואס די אזוי גערופענע "חב"ד סייטס" האבן נאכגעשריבן איינער פון אנדערען איז סתם נאריש. טא, וואזשע טוט מען? מ'בעט פון אייך, חשוב'ע ליינער, אריינשרייבן אייערע געדאנקן און זכרונות


Anonymous said...

write English if you want me to Know what you wrote,

Anonymous said...

as a chasidishe yungerman you should say, you read him in yidishe Likutie sichos, he was the writer after Uriel Tzimmer.

Anonymous said...

to be accurate he was editor of grammer and syntax. not the writer of Likutei Sichois

Der Litvak said...

Even the most Chassidshe Yungerman won't know "Heishkeh" from Likkutei Sichos. To know Likkutei Sichos is to know the Rebbe [albeit via the many gifted conduits as R' Yoel, R' leibel, of which R' Heishkeh was but one].

R' Heishkeh, in addition to being a prolific master of the Yiddish language, was an original thinker and independent social critic. I don't think the author is out of place by saying he "knew" Heishkeh through is various writings in the Algemeiner [or any other publication].

To know Heishkeh was indeed, to read the thoughts, stories and ideas he so gracefully shared with us.

He will be sorely missed by those that knew this gem of a soul in person, as he will by those that "knew" him through his delightful writings.

schneur said...

Firstly Baruch Dayan Ha-Emes.
I am not going to be maspid him (after all he was a Chasid).
He was one of the few Chabad people in recent years who knew Yiddish well. Unlike other Chassidc groups few of the third generation Chabad people know Yiddish well or even "durchshnitlech".
I read him in the Algemeiner and I loved his White Russian Yiddish (even though he came from Northern Ukraine they were in the White Russian Jewish cultural sphere influence.).
His descriptions of his family "zaide rav" etc were very moving.He wrote well of his shtetl under Communist rule and the resisitance of frume Yidden to this new order.he was the last real creative writer in the Algemeiner.He knew Yiddish with all the gleicch vertlech. The others are what my father would call piatzkers as distinct from artists.In fact Heshe made a living from being a printer in the Yiddish Forward for many years(after the death of others he also wrote the Parsha colum for that newspaper).
As with any writer there is much in his writing that I took issue with.He was also unmerciful with his critics, when a more generous attitude would have been in better taste.
In recent years he started reviewing books and at times was less than successful in this field as shown in his review of "Kemotze Shalal Rav " 2 years ago.
The Algemeiner will be a lot poorer for his loss and the loss of a Chasid mekori is a loss for all.

Anonymous said...

the choker and biographer Katzman was also mad on his book review of the Kemotze Shalal, but personally I believe Dubrovsky was correct, he smelled good a Farshtinkener Fish

schneur said...

How could he have been right when Rav Katzman showed schvartz af vais that the mechaber of the sefer did in fact bring down the Rebbes of chabd and others . if you don't believe katzman look at the sefer yourself.something our critic der niftar alav hasholem ,said he did not, . Obviously like others he nevrr looked into the sefer itself...although he reviewed it.

schneur said...

If there is someone who wishes to collect his writings and publish a book , please let me know I would be interested in such a project as his writings have a nitzchosdike value.

leybul said...

אוי זיידע