188 —הבהרות על הגהות הצ"צ, מקורות תורה, וכיבוד אבות קדומים

B"H, the 25th day of the month of Nissan, 5705.

Brooklyn, NY.

BaYom HaZeh Ba'u Midbar Sinai. 5705.

Shalom u'Vrachah!

In response to your letter, which was received after some delay, and also afterwards my reply was delayed for various reasons. I ask your forgiveness for this. Due to the immense preoccupations surrounding my father-in-law, the Rebbe shlita, he gave me your letter to review and respond to it. I am writing here what seems appropriate in my opinion. I would be happy to know your view on what I write below.

a) Regarding what you wrote: I was very troubled by the glosses of the holy tzaddik Yisrael on Torah Or Siddur in section 14 on Mizmor Tefillah L'David. It is a mitzvah to clarify. The gloss (of the tzt"z) states: "Gladden the soul of Your servant for to You, my L-rd, I lift up my soul. N.B. (in some versions it is Havayah). Rabbi Yerucham Leiner, London." The answer: The source for this has already been shown in Shaar HaKolel by Rabbi R.A.D. Lavat printed in part two of that Siddur chapter 11 section 23: "So it is brought in Zohar Balak end p.72b; see there in Mikdash Melech that they are four letters of Havayah." However, if not for concern I would say: The tzt"z's glosses were copied from his own Siddur margins. Apparently from Shaar HaKolel's wording, the tzt"z's words are only two words: "some versions Havayah." The copyist erred in citing the gloss because its place is on verse eight: "There is none like You among the gods, my L-rd," where in some versions Havayah appears here as G-d's name—as stated in Minchat Shai. If so: a) The source for tzt"z's gloss is straightforward since in Zohar and Mikdash Melech there is no strong proof that Havayah is written in this verse itself; b) This explains why tzt"z did not comment on verse eight which has two versions: Adnai or Havayah. Especially since in Arizal's Siddur (by R.S.M. Rashkov), who was among tzt"z's scribes (found in my father-in-law's library), it says: "Gladden... to You Adnai..." as it appears in all books—and yet tzt"z notes there are alternate readings; "There is none like You among the gods Havayah...", differing from Minchat Shai and what is written elsewhere as Adnai—and on this he does not comment.

b) Regarding what you wrote about referencing sources for our Sages' statements (as here): "this is using scholars—meaning to justify and clarify their words as Rashi says Berachot 47a": This seems inaccurate because according to Rashi even if one knows the source but not its reasoning or logic he is still considered not to have served scholars—as seen from Rashi's language Sotah 22a; according to Rashi the main aspect of Talmud—what Berachot and Sotah call serving scholars after reading Scripture and Mishnah—is knowing reasons behind laws based on logic. A strong proof for Rashi's view is Berachot there where even one who studies Sifra and Sifri is still called not having served scholars—even though those works usually bring laws together with their scriptural source. But Rambam and Shulchan Aruch disagree with Rashi—that even knowing just the source counts as Talmud (the issue in Berachot can be resolved but this isn't the place). See also Kuntres Acharon Hilchot Talmud Torah (by Admor Hazaken) beginning ch.2.

c) Regarding your note about honoring one's father even when he is a fourth generation ancestor—this requires analysis especially if—as above—this refers to a gloss by Admor Hazaken with a daughter between generations; see Shulchan Aruch Yoreh Deah sec.240 par.24: "Some say...", see commentaries and Gra there; even according to the second opinion there that says otherwise it seems it's only regarding one's grandfather but brings proof from Midrash Rabbah which refers only to grandfather—not higher generations—so we have no proof that honoring parents applies further back; see Rambam Hilchot Edut ch.13 halacha 5 regarding testimony—the father with his grandson is invalid but with great-grandson valid; see also commentaries Yoreh Deah sec.245 regarding Talmud Torah—there's a distinction between grandson and great-grandson; see Hilchot Talmud Torah by Admor Hazaken ch.1 halacha 8-9. Although there's no proof perhaps there's an allusion otherwise—that even after several generations there's still room for honoring parents—from Chazal (Bava Batra 91b) on "He placed a throne for mother of the king," referring to Ruth—which obviously is just an allusion.

Summary

The Rebbe addresses intricate textual questions about emendations by tzt"z, clarifies how tracing sources and understanding their logic differ across authorities, and explores whether honoring ancestors extends beyond immediate parents—all with scholarly precision.