8939 —סירוב להוציא פסקי הלכה למעשה והדרכה במחלוקות רבניות

B"H, 15 Shevat 5725.

Brooklyn.

Haraha"g vavac"h iy"a nu"n tznam"s involved in tzt"z etc. HaRam.

Shalom u'Vrachah!

In response to your letters, in which you propose that I enter into written clarification of practical halachic rulings on several matters you enumerate and detail in your letters. Surely you know that, in general, it is not my role to involve myself in issuing practical halachic rulings, especially on issues where many are already discussing the matter and examining it from all sides. This is the path outlined by my revered father-in-law, the Rebbe, in the household of the Rebbe—except for rare cases where there are specific reasons and important causes to enter such debates as mentioned above.

Especially since there are many in New York and America in general who would rejoice greatly if such matters were presented to them for their opinion (of course I mean rabbis who are worthy of the mantle of authority, to rule without bias and practically), and surely they will also appreciate your publishing their words, etc. Please accept my apologies.

In addition to the main reason above, I also lack the time and opportunity to fulfill such a request.

With honor and blessing, Menachem Schneersohn

To note from our sages: "At the time when they scatter... gather" (Berachos 63a)—and this is also the reason regarding matters where things are scattered.

Regarding what Haraha"g etc. Harari"m HaKohen wrote about Beit HaShemesh—I was surprised by its content. Especially since I have known him for a long time; it is not clear how he could write such things (unless perhaps because he does not have at hand Kuntres Hashlamah, Sefer Zikaron Yosef, Bnei Tzion, Divrei Chanah, Kaneh Vekinnamon). Perhaps he wrote so because he wished to defend what was written at the end of Chidushei HaRama Lublin and his supporters—and he overlooked what I wrote on this in my notes on Orach Chaim 661. And that should suffice.

Regarding what was written about Admur Hazaken’s position in his Siddur on this matter—Admur Hazaken did not rely there nor bring either the Yerushalmi or Radbaz; as for the difficulty raised—that even if we say Rabbeinu Tam is a lone opinion since Chida wrote in Shem Hagedolim that Shulchan Aruch’s ruling follows the greats of his generation (and if we interpret this as halacha—Chida’s words—it would be preferable to challenge and refute all of Rema’s words wherever he disagrees with Shulchan Aruch, for we never heard that Rema’s court had two hundred and one greats. In any case) this does not apply to Admur Hazaken’s words who was precise: Rabbeinu Tam and his supporters are a minority against the Geonim. And after them etc., besides writing that Shulchan Aruch retracted. As for bringing Pri Chadash, Chida, and Aruch Hashulchan—in our case all wrote according to the Geonim (Pri Chadash is cited in Siddur there; Birkei Yosef and Aruch Hashulchan—in Orach Chaim 661 there).

For explanation of these opinions—see also Sefer Minchat Cohen, Sefer Beit HaShemesh (by Harari"m Toktinski). See entry Beit HaShemesh in Encyclopedia Talmudit. Part of it was printed in Likkutei Sichos vol. 11 p. 247 and completed based on a copy from the secretariat.

Summary

The Rebbe teaches that one should defer practical halachic rulings to qualified local authorities rather than seeking guidance from those outside their community or sphere of responsibility. He emphasizes humility before established rabbinic process and careful study of sources.