3908 —המגרש בתל אביב שניתן במתנה: בעלות, שימושים ומכירה

B"H, 29 MarCheshvan, 5716

Brooklyn.

The Rav and Gaon, the Rav and Chassid, engaged in communal affairs, the distinguished Chassid, a G‑d-fearing man, etc., Reb Eliezer [Karasik] shlita, Reb Pinchas [Althaus] shlita, Reb Chaim Shmaryahu [Gurary] shlita,

Greetings and blessing!

In reply to your letter of 21 Cheshvan with its enclosure — the bylaws of the Torah Das Chesed Tzedakah society and the letter of its administration — in which you write about the lot in Tel Aviv, etc., and ask my opinion:

a) Experience in matters of the Holy Land, may it be rebuilt and established, shows that if any ownership whatever remains with anyone, one cannot be sure of avoiding aggravation later on. Therefore the stipulation that the lot be registered not only in the name of Agudas Chassidei Chabad but also in the name of Torah Das Chesed Tzedakah does not seem right to me. All the more so since it is also not understood: if they do not wish to be involved at all, and if they are to have no part in the building, what benefit will they gain from the lot being in their name as well? It only gives someone the possibility of saying that he too is an owner, etc. And even if none of the present members of the administration is to be suspected at all of such a thing, the building and its use are for long days and good years, so the possible changes in the administration of that society must also be taken into account. And the main point is that there is no reasonable ground why they should insist on this demand. It is understood that their merit is not to be diminished at all; accordingly, "publicize those who do a mitzvah" — that they gave the lot as a gift — and let this be printed on all the forms, but leave no room for ownership, as above. For the building will surely cost a considerable sum, and if it is built on a lot in which others too have a share, it is liable to lead to frictions, etc. — and a word to the wise is sufficient.

b) It would be proper that they not limit themselves specifically to a yeshivah on this lot. Especially since, according to their letters, in which they repeated it twice and three times, it is hard to obtain students in Tel Aviv, almost impossible, etc. — and surely they have kept copies of their letters. And it is understood that to invest tens of thousands of pounds in a building and then bring students from Lod only in order to fill the building — it is very questionable whether this is worthwhile. Perhaps there is also room to think of evening classes for youth, and of vocational training under the wings of Agudas Chassidei Chabad and Tzeirei Agudas Chabad; also of a hall for the meetings of Agudas Chassidei Chabad, Tzeirei Agudas Chabad, Nshei uBnos Chabad, etc., etc.

c) All the above is only for lack of choice; but it is understood that the most proper course is that the Torah Das Chesed Tzedakah society agree to sell the lot, and that this money be invested in buildings in Kfar Chabad, with all the above credits — that it be written that this was done with their money, etc., etc.

Awaiting a detailed letter in connection with the above, and many thanks in advance,

M. Schneerson

Publisher's notes

Eliezer (אליעזר): Karasik. Further letters to him: above, vol. 6, 1560, and the references in the notes there; below, 4037, 4195, 4272.

Pinchas (פנחס): Althaus. Further letters to him: above, vol. 10, 2967, and the references in the notes there; below, 4037, 4054.

Chaim Shmaryahu (חיים שמרי'): Gurary. Further letters to him: above, vol. 6, 1549, and the references in the notes there; below, 4037.

TDChTz (תדח"ץ): Torah Das Chesed Tzedakah. See also below, there.