5720 —הוצאת הלכות גדולות עם פירוש והערות מערכת

B"H, 9 Elul, 5717.

Brooklyn.

Haraha"g vavac"h iy"a nu"n oseik b'tzt"z rav pe'alim etc. Menashe Klein

Shalom u'Vrachah!

I was pleased to be informed about your efforts in publishing the sefer by one of the early authorities, Halachos Gedolos, with an extensive commentary. May Hashem grant you merit and success so that the book will soon appear in print.

May it be His will that you expand your Torah activities, both in general Torah matters—great and small (from which it is implied there are both)—as our Sages explain: 'davar gadol v'davar katan' (Bava Basra 134a), referring to the main bodies of Torah and its inner soul, as expressed and explained in the Zohar (III:152a), a complete Torah.

With honor and blessings for a kesivah v'chasimah tovah.

Regarding a haskamah (letter of approbation)—it is known that this is not customary in the house of the Rebbe. Please accept my apologies.

For the sake of cherishing the matter—words of the Rishonim from whom we live—I am copying here some notes from the printed leaf at the beginning of this sefer which you left with me.

Mishnah Halachos. Section 1. "Bar Yisrael"—begins with "Ish: Bar Yisrael... l'kedushah...", and as in the Mishnah "ha-ish mekadesh"—for so is the language of Scripture: "ki yikach ish ishah..." (when a man takes a woman...). See also Rambam's language at the start of Hilchos Ishus.

[As for why it changes in the first chapter of Kiddushin to "ha-ishah nikneis," this is explained in the Gemara there.]

Especially here, where it continues: "mibayi lei l'kedushah... u'levareich... u'mimsar..."—all these are actions performed by the man. Note also what our Sages say as brought by Rashi (Shmuel I 20:30).

It should be clarified if this is indeed the style of Ba'al Halachos Gedolos—"Bar Yisrael d'ba'i," for seemingly it is obvious [that it refers to a Jew].

Later on, from Or Zarua comes the version "man d'ba'i." Perhaps this was chosen because of how that section ends: "mi-mekor Yisrael."

In-text: "u'mimsar la kesubah." The timing for giving over the kesubah—there are various opinions: Rambam Hilchos Ishus ch.10; Tur/Shulchan Aruch Even HaEzer siman 66; others in commentaries.

In any case, it is surprising that there is no mention here about Birchas Chassanim—whether after or before handing over [the kesubah]. In my opinion, this omission by copyist or printer is evident.

In Sheiltos (Chayei Sarah 16): "man d'ba'i l'minsev itteta mibayi lei l'kedushei b'reisha u'levareich birchas eirusin b'asara u'birchas chassanim b'asara u'mimsar la kesubasa." Similarly should be said here. This also fits well with what follows: that Rav Nachman asks for a source for Birchas Chassanim.

In Haamek Sheilah on Sheiltos there he edits and adds to Ba'al Halachos Gedolos here the word "b'asara" after "birchas eirusin," explaining his intent to bring proof from Beis Yosef (who does not address it directly) that ten are required for Birchas Chassanim because ten are required elsewhere—and besides that Ba'al Halachos Gedolos should have clarified this—it remains puzzling why Birchas Chassanim was omitted entirely.

Mishnah Halachos section 2. And our master did not have the version "bar Natan." Nor does Sheiltos there have this version. Haamek Sheilah explains that one must say those words are an editorial gloss since Rav Huna bar Natan became king after Rav Ashi who was born when Rava died, who was Rav Nachman's colleague. Already noted in Seder HaDoros (entry Rav Huna bar Natan) that we find Rav Huna bar Natan challenged Rava (Nedarim 12a), perhaps he was very old or perhaps there were two people by that name. But Rashi on Nedarim prints simply Rav Huna without 'bar Natan.' This all needs careful study in Dikdukei Soferim.

Mishnah Halachos section 3. Through chuppah and kiddushin. Based on our Sages’ statement 'milta albisheihu yakira,' I am copying what I wrote about this in a maamar by Admor HaZaken (author of Tanya), in his sefer Torah Or (98d): 'Why do we say “Who sanctifies His people Israel through chuppah and kiddushin”? The question arises why we reverse the order to mention chuppah before kiddushin? The answer is because chuppah represents makif (encompassing light), which relates to G‑d’s act at Sinai when He “held the mountain over them like a barrel”—this was a revelation of makif as explained earlier; therefore chuppah must precede kiddushin so that receiving Torah—the aspect of kiddushin—comes through drawing down makif first, which brings about self-nullification (“na’aseh” before “nishma”), enabling then an extension and revelation within Torah.' End quote.

Summary

The Rebbe commends Menashe Klein’s scholarly work on publishing Halachos Gedolos with commentary, clarifies why he does not provide haskamahs, and offers detailed editorial notes on textual variants regarding marriage laws—highlighting precision in halachic transmission and study.