427 —ביקורת על משנת בנימין, ציטוט צ"צ, ומנהגים על אלמנות וגרושות

B"H, Festival of Redemption, 19 Kislev, 5709.

Haraha"ch vavav"ch iy"a nu"m oseik b'tzt"z etc. Moharash Poizner

Shalom u'Vrachah!

Regarding the books of Rabbi A.B. Silberberg that you sent me—these books are not in my possession nor in the library of the Melamed Chassidim. I have only seen by chance his responsa Mishnat Binyamin. When I reviewed it, I was satisfied—especially considering our time and country which, in the words of my father-in-law the Rebbe shlita (about another country) in his introduction to Kuntres Etz HaChaim: "Avrechim described as geniuses and prodigies, beardless and with cut peyos, delve into deep sugyos and build towers to permit every mitzvah matter, leaving it a bare body without a soul; they pride themselves on overturning the logic of Geonim and demolishing prohibitions of Rishonim." In such an environment a book is published upholding our ancestral customs—and koach de-hetera (the power to permit) should not override common sense or sway it from true judgment. (I am surprised why he deviated from this approach—in Siman 76 he speaks weakly about placing a microphone in shul on Rosh Hashanah with supplication language; yet even though there are those who permit after all precautions (some opinions are cited in Pardes 5705), this is a matter left to laymen—and if permitted on Yom Tov they will do so also on Shabbos. The wise person sees that this opens a breach leading to Torah prohibitions. Even if after much analysis he found no clear prohibition, at least he should not have published this responsum and given room for people to say: see—even those who are stringent are lenient here. On such matters it is said: If speech is worth a sela (coin), silence is worth two.)

But what astonished me when reading the book was that although he cites later authorities extensively, he is careful never to mention even once our Alter Rebbe or tzt"z or their rulings. See Rama Orach Chaim and Netivot Choshen Mishpat Siman 28 regarding the authority of works accepted among Israel and an error in Nosei Keilim on Shulchan Aruch being like an error in a clear halacha (hinted at in Hilchos Talmud Torah by our Alter Rebbe ch.2). At first I judged favorably that perhaps the author had not seen or did not know these works (see Shelah end Balak on 'I sinned for I did not know'), but then I saw he cites Sdei Chemed etc., who themselves cite Admor Hazaken and tzt"z frequently.

I am therefore pointing out some locations—not all—where tzt"z discusses these topics which are central debates in Mishnat Binyamin (since incidental references are many). Mishnat Binyamin Responsa Siman 61—see tzt"z Shaar HaMiluim beginning Siman 12. Incidentally: what he writes there that eating kodshim is permitted sitting and cites Tosafot Yoma 25a—there are two opinions there; according to those who permit sitting for eating kodshim it must specifically be sitting since it's learned from 'le-mishcha' (for anointment). If so as written there—it would mean nesiat kapayim must also be done sitting! This is obviously incorrect. See Chullin 132b: 'they are only eaten...' etc., see Maggid Mishneh Hilchos Maaseh Hakorbanot ch.10 halacha 10. From Rambam's wording that there is no sitting in the Azarah it seems he holds even kohanim are included (though it's not absolute proof since Rambam often only brings explicit laws). See Be'er Sheva on Tamid ch.1; so too tzt"z Taamei HaMitzvos mitzvah 102 & 277 writes simply that kohanim eat standing.

There Siman 18—see Likutim at end of tzt"z's Psak Din.

Responsa Divrei Nachmia Orach Chaim Siman 9.

Responsa Shearit Yehuda Orach Chaim Siman 61.

There at end Siman 25—see Responsa tzt"z Even HaEzer end Siman 11 where many discuss 'Shomer Peta'im Hashem' (G‑d protects the simple)—this applies even to Torah scholars who know the danger.

On the topic of marrying widows or divorcees—see Pesachim 112a where there is also an advantage for divorcees over widows; Shaar HaPesukim by Arizal end Parshat Ki Tetze: "the divorcee is purer than all—even more than widow or chalutzah—if not for what our sages said about three opinions regarding beds." In several books (cited in Nitzotzei Zohar Zohar II p.102a) after twelve months there is no danger at all with a widow; Zohar Chai ibid quotes Heichalot Moshe that marrying off a widow to a Torah scholar actually benefits her late husband's soul; already printed is Tikkun Nisuin Almana by Maharshal Sharabi—but apparently Ashkenazim do not practice this custom; see tzt"z ibid regarding Torah scholars nowadays on such matters.

What he writes in Mishnat Binyamin based on Shelah—that one should not match with a divorcee who later became a chalutzah—he does not cite where this appears in Shelah nor explain why; seemingly per Shaar HaPesukim this would be preferable to marrying a widow.

There end Siman 34—see Responsa tzt"z Shaar HaMiluim Orach Chaim at its start & Psak Din there.

What he writes about saying in Birkat Hamazon 'HaSimcha BiMe'ono SheAchalnu MiShelO' instead of just 'SheAchalnu MiShelO'—this indeed is how it appears in all Chabad siddurim.

What he writes about saying 'Yitgadal V'yitkadash' with closed Tavs—the custom and instruction from Beis HaRav is open Tavs; so too Yaavetz's nusach in his siddur—as I wrote at length at end of Kuntres for Beis Nissan 5708.

I will conclude with blessings for Festival of Redemption, Yud-Tes Kislev 5559—the beginning of 'Yafutzu Maayanotecha Chutzah' (your wellsprings shall spread outward), which has grown ever since (see Iggeret Kodesh sec.14), so that now we will soon see fulfilled also Mashiach's promise to the Baal Shem Tov—that then will come redemption literally—a true and complete redemption.

Summary

The Rebbe highlights the importance of referencing foundational Chabad authorities like Admor Hazaken and tzt"z when discussing halachic issues, critiques selective citation practices, addresses customs regarding widows/divorcees, and encourages spreading Chassidus as begun on Yud-Tes Kislev.