Gems from מרן שר התורה, Rav Chaim Kanievsky שליט"א, on Learning and Reviewing Shas

ש"ס is in the air, as one סיום follows another, ב"ה.

Therefore it is quite timely to share some shas related tidbits from Maran Sar HaTorah, Rav Chaim Kanievsky shlit"a, adapted from a publication from ארצנו הקדושה (note: these are general ideas, some of which may be more relevant for ארץ ישראל. Of course everything must be done with proper deliberation, שיקול הדעת, before applying them, lest they ח"ו be applied inappropriately, leading to a situation of possible יצא שכרו בהפסדו ר"ל).

Question: From what age should youngsters be encouraged to go through all of Shas?

Response: מו"ר ר' מיכל יהודה ליפקוביץ זצ"ל said in the name of the Chazon Ish, that by בר מצוה shas must be completed.

Question: Is that not in the category of תפסת מרובה לא תפסת (if you try to seize too much, you will not succeed, whereas if you try to seize less you will)?

Response: It is not meant to know the entire shas by then, but just to go through it. I too learned shas with my sons by the age of Bar Mitzvah.

Question: If the child is saying it (gemara) without understanding, or, say with someone older, that is, let's say traveling, and wants to take advantage of the time, is there an ענין to recite pages of gemara without understanding at all?

Response: Surely. The gemara שבת סג says ליגמר איניש והדר ליסבר ואף דלא ידע מאי קאמר, אף שלא יודע כלום (a person should learn - recite Torah - and later seek to understand, explain it, even if he does not know what he is saying at first, even if he doesn't understand at all).

Question: Did you also finish shas with your father by your bar mitzvah?

Response: No, my father learned with me the מסכתות that I wanted to learn.

Question: At what age did you first make a siyum hashas.

Response: At sixteen.

Question: Rav Aharon Leib Steinman זצ"ל related that R. Schneur Zalman of Liadi, before writing his Shulchan Aruch, sat in Mohilev for sixteen hours on the bank of the river Dniester (seemingly should be Dnieper) and reviewed Shas in his mind. So the question was raised, was it not related that the Gaon of Vilna learned the entire Shas every month?  Why did it take the GRA longer to learn shas?

Response: The first story was a case בהרהור (in thought), such a thing is possible. In the GRA case he learned shas inside (with a sefer).

Question: How long should it take to go through all of shas in thought (במחשבה)?

Response: Half an hour (I think).

Question: If someone has a daf yomi shiur, can he still make a siyum even if he did not learn through all of shas (he sat and listened to the shiur, not necessarily saying all the words of the gemara)?

Response: One can make a siyum based on הרהור, according to the GR"A, and surely on listening, where we have a principle of שומע כעונה.

Question: Does learning gemara without Rashi qualify for a siyum too?

Response: Yes. Even in the time of אביי, from where we learn the ענין of celebrating a siyum, learning was without רש"י.

Question: If someone missed a bit of the מסכת, is it still considered a siyum?

Response: It is not קריאת התורה, where missing even a letter holds one back. Only if one misses a complete sugya is it a problem.

There are additional interesting questions and answers there, but I think the above suffice to give you a nice taste, and to whet your appetite. Those that want to see more should click on the photos below.

אשרינו מה טוב חלקנו

אשרינו שיש לנו רבי כזה

סימן טוב ומזל טוב יהא לנו ולכל ישראל אמן

Lubavitch Introspection on Display in Op-ed, & Understanding Rabbi Y.Y. Jacobson's Appeal

I came across a remarkable op-ed at a Lubavitch website the other day, by an anonymous bochur, in which he takes to task some of his fellow Chabad-Lubavitch Chasidim.

Even though this op-ed does not address all points of contention with Chabad-Lubavitch of course, seemingly focusing more on peripheral issues, it is still good to see some introspection, seeking to improve the situation, and lower tensions.

I think that a real test of a Chasid, especially a Lubavitcher, when he preaches ahavas Yisroel and the greatness of every Yid, is how he relates to a מתנגד (Lubavitch seems to use/prefer the terms מנגד/מנגדים). I don't understand how some such people can claim to love every Yid, but when it comes to Litvaks or Misnagdim, something seems to be missing in that department?

There is also an interesting aside there (at the end of the second to last paragraph) about the Lubavitcher speaker Rabbi Y.Y. (aka, as he called by Lubavitchers, Rabbi Yossi) Jacobson. The author implies that he is popular (and is invited to speak at non-Lubavitch places) because he cites other sources as well, not just typical Lubavitcher ones. That is definitely correct as one of the reasons for his popularity, as I see it.

Now, if such things are אמת and sincere, fine and well. But if they are just gestures, a show, a tactical move to help with הפצה of Chabad-Lubavitch (as we know they often, if not always, are :), well, that is another story, and we should not be fooled by window dressing.

And we non-Chasidim should introspect sometimes too. One of the things we can and should introspect about is the fact that some of us are at times inviting outside "inspirational" speakers that don't always share our השקפות, and are sometimes even actively at odds with them. Is it perhaps because we don't have enough of our own giving a פנימיות התורה message in accordance with our מסורה? We need to realize that times have changed and we can't just serve up נזיקין lomdishe nuggets for every meal. We need a varied and balanced Torah diet to be spiritually healthy.

הלואי that we all introspect and merit to reach and implement proper conclusions.

OU Whitewashes Chabad-Lubavitch, Participates in Messianic Torah Dedication

In the last issue of the OU's fine magazine Jewish Action, one of the main pieces featured was by Neo-Chasidus leader Rabbi Judah Mischel, a glowing portrayal of the impact of the late Lubavitcher Rebbe.

The problem with the puff piece however, is that it totally left out the Rebbe's Moshiach campaign, which ended disastrously, with Chasidim proclaiming him openly (in giant billboards, large newspaper advertisements, etc.) for years as the Messiah, while the Rebbe took ill and ultimately passed away, a debacle that continues, to this very day, in various ways, in one form or another.

Such a blatant and gaping omission is deceptive, misleading, and irresponsible. It is like someone writing a book on FDR and leaving out WWII.

Reb Judah also was allowed to insert a statement of Lubavitch doctrine there of cheilek Elokah mimaal mamash, blurring the line between man and Hakadosh Boruch Hu, as if it was standard Orthodox theology, sans disclaimer.

What has happened to the O-U? Has it become a Chabad-Lubavitch mouthpiece?

Just because Neo-Chasidus leader Rabbi Judah Mischel is close to Lubavitch and was hired to work for NCSY, doesn't mean that the O-U and Jewish Action have to become Chabad-Lubavitch mouthpieces.

An ostrich mentality, hiding ones head in the sand, is not befitting for a great organization that runs a very important kashrus certification agency.

Lest one think that this is just an academic issue, it can lead to practical pitfalls, as seen in a recent Hachnosas Sefer Torah at Lubavitch Headquarters in Crown Heights. In it a sefer Torah was presented to Lubavitch HQ in honor of Prof. Dershowitz for his efforts on behalf of justice for Sholom Mordechai Rubashkin. A leading O-U official participated in the event, not only by attending it at 770, which is festooned with signs proclaiming the late Rebbe as messiah, but also by holding a sefer Torah (with a green cover) with a messianic inscription on it, proclaiming יחי המלך. Such actions send signals of acceptance of Lubavitch messianism, which is against the spirit of the resolution of the OU's partner, the RCA, after the late Rebbe's passing.

As an aside, there seem to be significant grounds to suspect S.M. Rubashkin of being a continuing believer in the late Rebbe as Messiah, namely 1) this event, held at the 770 congregation, which is under messianic domination, and 2) a letter that he wrote years ago referring to the Rebbe shlit"a many years after his petirah (see line five of page two).

Let us hope that in the future people will be more careful and responsible, and not send out mixed and improper messages.

A gutten chodesh.