4347 —הבהרת אי הבנות בנוגע לתארים ולכוונה במכתב קודם

B"H, 19 Iyar, 5716.

Brooklyn.

Haraha"g Haraha"ch iy"a nu"n oseik b'tzt"z tznam"s etc. HaRash"i

Shalom u'Vrachah!

In response to your letters from the 7th and 8th of Iyar: I was very surprised by what you wrote regarding my letter—that since it did not specify to whom it was addressed, it led to interpretations—interpretations that are completely unfitting for the letter, b) which are refuted by the content itself, c) I did not rely on this and emphasized at the end of my letter by explicitly rejecting both points you mention.

a) It is impossible that I intended to offend the honor of the one to whom I wrote, since the content of my letter proves exactly the opposite—as is explicitly written there from our Sages and the word "ashirim." Moreover, at the end of my letter I referenced Horayos 11a, where it discusses Rabbeinu HaKadosh, who does not bear the title "Nasi" under discussion. Is it possible that I am suspected of improper conduct, G‑d forbid, toward Rabbeinu HaKadosh?

b) Regarding what you wrote about "the state," nowhere in my entire letter is this discussed at all. At its conclusion I explicitly emphasized: in connection with Am Yisrael at a time when... Am Yisrael are "downtrodden and pressed... upon them," which comes from our Sages (Yevamot 47a), which surely is not unknown to your honor and is relevant to halachah in Shulchan Aruch; and no one has ever said that this law is now nullified. The acceptance of converts proves this.

c) Regarding what you wrote that so-and-so is called "Nasi" (President) of a certain party or group—it is surprising you raised this point, since to negate this question I copied at the end of my letter: not Nasi of a tribe etc. Incidentally, this also proves there is no disrespect toward anyone since there it refers to Nachshon ben Aminadav, first among the Nesi'im etc. The meaning of "Nasi" in our case differs; it has long been used with a specific meaning connected to messianic ideas—with satisfaction I read in newspapers here that at a recent congress in Jerusalem it was declared from the podium that obviously the messianic vision has not yet been fulfilled and this is not yet the coming of Mashiach etc., and no one objected. If only those who fear G‑d had found enough courage to say so eight years ago—many troubles that befell Am Yisrael since then would not have occurred or would have been much less severe. The greatest trouble is the confusion among some Jews, especially among youth.

All this seems so obvious to me that at first I doubted whether to respond at all refuting these interpretations—since apparently there is only one explanation for such strange suspicion etc., so what would be gained by answering? What compelled me to write was—in addition to our Sages' teaching that everyone should be judged favorably—and perhaps those making these claims truly think there is some basis for these suspicions—the main reason was my astonishment and also my distress which I wished to express; if you find it appropriate please convey this as well: In my two-page letter—its essence being an inner cry over thousands upon thousands of Jews who in recent years have abandoned Torah and mitzvot—and specifically after arriving on holy soil watched over by G‑d from year's beginning to end—and most are youth—the future of Am Yisrael—even if one were to say there was no hint whatsoever (even indirectly), still when someone seeks self-harm all means are used to prevent him.

The only point your honor mentions in your letter—which apparently was our sole topic—is omitting a title! By the way, my letter was sent in an envelope on which "President" was written as a title; had there been any basis for these suspicions, surely such an envelope would not have been used. Especially since it would have been simple for me to place it in an envelope addressed simply "to our friend," asking them to deliver it personally—and clearly using "President" carries none of those concerns. In truth—even more than concern—based on what I've seen as youth's reaction regarding use of "Nasi" in this context.

To dispel even strange questions: Why did I not use "President" inside the letter? Simply because omitting titles is my personal practice—especially as many who write in Hebrew omit titles entirely so as not to embarrass those without them; whereas changing someone's title involves interfering with others' affairs—which is something else entirely. This too seems obvious; it's unfortunate time must be spent addressing baseless questions—but it's worthwhile if it leads anyone toward action regarding my letter's true content.

With honor and blessing for good news.

Summary

The Rebbe clarifies misunderstandings about omitting titles in correspondence, emphasizing respect for all parties involved and urging focus on urgent spiritual concerns affecting Jewish youth rather than peripheral issues like formalities or titles.