522 —הערות על פרד"ס הארץ, שאלות הלכתיות, ומנהגים חסידיים

Shalom u'Vrachah! Haraha"ch vavac"h iy"a nu"m etc. Moreinu HaRav Yitzchak Horowitz. Your letter with the photograph has been received. Surely among our circle there are others connected who will also send their photographs in due course. Especially in these auspicious days for baalei teshuvah (those returning to G‑d), as is known: the first forty days were days of favor—on the level of tzaddikim; during the third set of forty days, the Jewish people were baalei teshuvah.

These days I received—from New York itself—a copy of your sefer Pardes HaAretz, without any explanatory letter about it. If it is a gift from you, I thank you for honoring me with it. Out of fondness for this matter, even though time does not permit me to review it as thoroughly as needed, I will share a few brief comments.

a) Page 65 regarding Aristotle—his book "Yavo Shiloh" is not in my possession. What you wrote from Sefer HaGilgulim chapter 7 I did not find there nor elsewhere in the writings of the AriZal so far. But absence of evidence is not evidence of absence; I would appreciate if you inform me of its source. What you wrote from Seder HaDorot on this matter in the name of several books is well known.

b) At the beginning of the responsa section, pages 80-81: to note what you wrote regarding birur (selection) compared to what is written in tzt"z Responsa vol. II p.24ff and in Shaar HaMiluim at the end of part III.

c) Page 107: It seems that since the questioner named after the deceased and not after a living person, there is no concern about changing Jewish custom—especially since he did not know there was someone alive with that name; only your reasoning remains that one who is particular etc., but do not open [the issue]. Also what is written in Shulchan Aruch HaRav Orach Chaim siman 600—the plain meaning suggests it only refers to naming after one's living father.

d) Page 105: My father z"l and my uncle Haraha"ch z"l married two sisters by directive of my revered teacher and Rebbe n"a (may he rest in Eden), with his instruction that they should not live in the same city. The questions raised by Noda B'Yehuda from the Talmud have already been answered in Sefer Mekor Chesed on Sefer Chassidim—that on the contrary: "Go out and see what happened at their end," as related by our Sages (Yerushalmi Taanit ch.4 halacha 5; Bava Batra 12a—and I am among those who came later).

e) Page 123: That he should deliver the get (divorce document) before witnesses for delivery and then have witnesses sign and deliver it again—it seems for several reasons that it is better, at least ideally, to write another get and have them sign etc.

f) At the beginning of the derush section, page 213—the manuscript's question: note that knowledge of Seder Hishtalshelut (the order of spiritual worlds) is a lofty mitzvah (Tanya ch.156b), as well as from Shabbat 2b.

g) In this week's Torah portion—pages 501-502—and regarding what you wrote: "VeHigadeti Hayom LaHashem Ki Vati..." (And I declared today to Hashem that I have come...)—this is entirely unclear. The idea: "And you shall come to the kohen—not to a king or leader." "Today...I have come"—as if new; what exists today in Eretz Yisrael is only because today one merits it; one's own merit is insufficient—only because Hashem swore to our forefathers; only after this admission does "and he shall take..." follow.

Summary

The Rebbe responds with gratitude for a scholarly gift and offers detailed halachic feedback on various issues raised within it, emphasizing precision in sources and traditions while highlighting humility before G‑d's kindness and communal connection among Chassidim.