NCSY Heads to Uman

NCSY is a well known youth movement in the Modern Orthodox community, which has brought many young people closer to Judaism and Torah for decades. It has also garnered support from segments of the more right wing "Yeshiva World" at times as well.

Lately, however, they evidently are increasingly under the influence of the neo-Hasidic segment of Modern Orthodoxy. This recently became more prominent, front and center, with the appointment of neo-Chasidus leader Rabbi Judah Mischel as Mashpia (a Chasidic title/position seemingly created there for him, as was created for his mentor, neo-Chasidus leader Rabbi Moshe Weinberger, at YU-RIETS a few years back) of NCSY (see also here).

It is important to understand that this is not just some low level appointment. Rather, it is a pivotal new development, as it is reported that he will be working closely with all levels of NCSY staff and dispensing guidance.

Surprisingly though (or perhaps not surprisingly), the OU doesn't mention explicitly, or detail his neo-Chasidism in their announcements of it. It seems that they are trying to hide it, flying under the radar, to make it like he is just some neutral inspirational mainstream Orthodox figure, rather than one of the top neo-Chasidic leaders.

Who is Rabbi Judah Mischel?

Rabbi Judah Mischel is a person who has transformed Camp HASC (where he is executive director) in the last few years into a major platform for the promotion of neo-Chasidus among young people, and now, with his elevation at NCSY, is in position to do more of the same there, this time with the reach, prestige and influence of the O-U behind him. He is someone who regularly goes to Uman for Rosh Hashanah and promotes that to others as well. He also has significant personal, as well as family, ties to Lubavitch. He founded an organization called Tzama Nafshi, which works to spread neo-Chasidus among the Modern Orthodox, by means such as a special tour to graves of famous Chasidic Rebbes in Europe.

This a significant departure from the O-U and NCSY's past. Is NCSY, the National Council of Synagogue Youth, becoming NCSY, Neo Chasidic Synagogue Youth? This is something worthy of examination, discussion, and thought.

This great shift at NCSY should be taken into account by OU members and officials, parents, donors, young people, people connected to NCSY, and any concerned community member. Is the OU now willingly becoming a vehicle to lead young people, the future of the community, away, in a different direction, to neo-Chasidus?

To get an idea of the mentality involved, a relevant illustration is a statement Rabbi Mischel made a few months ago - "There are three places that attract and unite Jews from all walks of life" he said, "Uman on Rosh Hashana, Meron on Lag Baomer, and Camp HASC."

Wait, you may say, what about the Kosel Maaravi? ירושלים עיה"ק, the city that Chazal said unites Yidden? No. He says the three places are Uman, Meron, and Camp HASC.

Well, if you want to try something new, what can I do, but personally, I am old-fashioned, and choose ירושלים.

Reb Mischel is known for stunts and merrymaking. But what may be popular in a summer camp environment is not necessarily what is desirable year round for searching youth.

How did Mischel get his new job? I am not privy to all the deliberations, but it is known that O-U Executive VP Allen Fagin is close to and has a very warm relationship with neo-Chasidus leader (the man Mischel calls his captain) Rabbi Moshe Weinberger (we have discussed Rabbi Weinberger and some of his controversial statements here in the past). A few months ago when Rabbi Weinberger had a special breakfast for his new Emek Hamelech institute, Fagin was there, sat on the dais, and exchanged kisses with Weinberger after the program. Weinberger gave effusive recognition and thanks to him for coming then, as well as being available when called in general, despite his busy schedule, in the beginning of his talk. It is not just Allen Fagin himself, however, it is a deeper, more extensive, family connection. Fagin's son is a longtime neo-Hasid and congregant of Rabbi Weinberger. In a video from the recent first selichos pre-Rosh Hashanah 5779 at Aish Kodesh, for example, Fagin family members can be clearly seen in the foreground (some in Hasidic garb, Mr. Allen Fagin himself in a light blue shirt, at the left of his son) extensively (he/they can be seen in some previous similar videos as well). So there is a deep relationship there. Hence it is quite logical to wonder if Mr. Fagin himself is lending a hand to the promotion of neo-Chasidus at the O-U/NCSY (of course, there are some others there as well under that influence, such as R. Bashevkin of NCSY, but he doesn't seem to be into Uman as R. Muschel is, or as extreme. Additionally, there is a difference between if there is one or few neo-Chasidic leaders in an organization, and if there are multiple such individuals).

Be that as it may or may not be, the point is that major change is under way at NCSY, and people should be made aware of it. An unacknowledged stealthy major change in orientation breeds suspicion and does not inspire trust. We don't want parents complaining in the future that Rabbi Mischel and NCSY made their children into neo-Chasidim.

Let us have some honesty, transparency, and forthrightness about the situation, rather than obfuscation and euphemisms.

The O-U Kashrus division is an industry leader due to its great staff of dedicated Torah scholars in the mainstream of the community. It would be logical for other divisions of the O-U, such as NCSY, to proceed in such a path as well, taking advantage of wise counsel of established senior תלמידי חכמים, rather than going בעצת נערים, with the fads of the youth, even if the latter are more popular on social media. Social media is not, and should not be, our guiding light.

May Hashem help us proceed on the right path and avoid pitfalls.

YU's Chasidic Revolution - A Pioneer Reflects

Over four years have elapsed since Rabbi Moshe Weinberger was brought back to YU/RIETS to spread Chasidus, sufficent time for students to have entered and graduated YU with him there for their whole tenure. As such, sufficient time has passed to take a hard look at what has occurred there, and on the neo-Chasidic front in general, in the last few years.

Fortunately, we are ב"ה aided in this vital work by reflections (last four paragraphs) shared by veteran RIETS Rosh Yeshiva and YU Chasidic pioneer R. Hershel Reichman, recently published in Kol Hamevaser, The Jewish Thought Magazine of the Yeshiva University Student Body.

Let us focus on a few important, fundamental points.

1) Neo-Chasidus at YU is a revolution, a revolutionary development. That cannot be denied. While some people may have wanted to (and still try to) pretend that bringing in R. Moshe Weinberger with special custom-designed provisions catering to him (special, limited, tailored hours, the new Chasidic title of mashpia, after starting first as mashgiach, etc.) and rolling out a red carpet for him, was just adding another faculty member, and nothing out of the ordinary, that is patently false. Such efforts to obscure the magnitude and significance of the move are diversionary and misleading.

2) The Rav (R. Yoshe Ber Soloveitchik) is old, neo-Chasidus at YU is new and hip. For many years, Modern Orthodoxy and RIETS/YU was dominated by the Rav, R. Yosef Dov Solovitchik z"l, and his Torah. Now, the pendulum has swung in a different direction. While the Rav and his legacy is still a giant presence in the YU/RIETS world, especially among older talmidim and staff, among some younger ones there is a significant shift, led by Rabbi Weinberger and others, away from Brisk, to locales like Medzhibozh, Uman, and Lubavitch.

3) R. Reichman, a devout Chasid himself, expresses disappointment at a decline in high level, intellectual, rigorous talmud Torah concomitant with the rise of neo-Chasidus.

Rabbi Reichman says that many talmidim leave the yeshiva knowing little of the Rav's Torah.

 And that is a key in a discussion like this. We need to look at the younger students, the future. What are the trends among the younger students?

The bringing in of R. Weinberger was done under Richard Joel, the first YU President lacking semicha,  and not simultaneously Rosh Yeshiva of RIETS. It was also done after the departure of longtime RIETS dean R. Zevulun Charlop. It is not coincidental that such a radical break with RIETS history and tradition took place took place under such a new regime.

With R. Weinberger on an extended trip to Eretz Yisrael (perhaps he is contemplating aliyah?), now seems like a good time for a cheshbon hanefesh, to sit down and assess the results of R. Weinberger's appointment and the YU/RIETS Chasidic revolution, and think about adjustments that may be in order after this extended period of revolutionary experimentation.

Let us hope that any corrections that need to be made are seriously considered, rather than ignored, or kicked down the road.

Rav Yitzchak Elchanan's Yeshiva (RIETS-YU) Turns To Hassidism

In the last few days, Yeshivas Rabbeinu Yitzchak Elchanan, the Yeshiva affiliated with YU, the flagship Modern Orthodox institution in the USA, has welcomed a new mashgiach, Rabbi Moshe Weinberger, who is a well known speaker, as well as the spiritual leader of a Hassidic congregation in Woodmere, New York.

While RIETS-YU has a number of mashgichim, this new appointee has gotten red carpet treatment (note especially photo with YU President Richard Joel at link), with special arrangements being made for him, to enable his serving in the position alongside his prior duties to his congregation, as well as other commitments. Although it hasn't been clearly stated, it is clear that he has gotten star billing, and special treatment. This indicates that he has a special status on the RIETS staff. Even if he is not officially chief mashgiach at this time, it is clear that he has a special status, de facto. The hoopla surrounding his arrival gives the impression that in the eyes of some there he is seen as a saviour of sorts for RIETS-YU. Like some kind of superstar, or spiritual version of a rock star (lehavdil).

The new appointment has surprised onlookers, who wonder how it fits in to RIETS-YU's long and proud heritage as a Lithuanian style ('Litvish') Yeshiva.  RIETS has never had a Hassidic mashgiach like this. It would have been unthinkable in the past, just like it is unthinkable at present that a Lithuanian type Yeshiva such as Lakewood or Mir would bring in a Chassidic Rebbe as a mashgiach, with a program of teaching Chassidus. See also the end of a post from way back in the beginning of last December by former YU Professor Dr. Alan Brill, along with incisive comments there, for misgivings in the Modern Orthodox community about this major shift.

What has brought about the new great change?

First, we should be aware that it has not occurred in a vacuum. Ground was laid for it in recent years by regular shiurim of RIETS Rosh Yeshiva Rabbi Hershel Reichman (a descendant of Belzer Chassidim like Rav Weinberger - oops, mistake there - Rabbi Weinberger's family Chasidic roots are Spinka, with some Nadvorna connection as well, heard from his own mouth) in Hassidism in YU, as well as the promotion of Chassidus by his son, Rabbi Zev Reichman, also a faculty member there, as well as a Rav in NJ. A few years ago they brought a prominent Hassidic leader, Rabbi Moshe Wolfson of Boro Park and Yeshiva Torah Vodaath, to RIETS/YU to speak,  something that would have been unthinkable in past years. Also, nowadays, in Western society, the zeitgeist is such that old barriers and differences are routinely reexamined and discarded.

Nevertheless, despite there having been occasional Hassidic gatherings in YU in the past, as well as a Lubavitch oriented Tanya club, they were, on the whole, marginal and extracurricular phenomena, which were not part of the main program of study. Similarly, while past President and Rosh Yeshiva Rabbi Dr. Lamm wrote extensively on Hassidism, that was extracurricular, and not his main role there. The new appointment of Rebbe Weinberger, however, remarkably, considering the history of RIETS, prominently institutionalizes a Hassidic program and influence there.

Which begs the question, has the well of Lithuanian Torah, Mussar, and Hashkafah, that sustained RIETS until now dried up? Has Torah UMadda run out of gas, that it has to turn to Brooklyn style Chassidism, albeit with a more sophisticated and modern presentation, as exemplified by Rabbi Weinberger, to try to sustain itself going forward?

In the past, students went to RIETS-YU to escape that kind of thing. Various prominent RIETS-YU talmidim that came from Yeshiva Torah Vodaath and similar backgrounds come to mind. They went to RIETS from Brooklyn seeking a broader type of Yiddishkeit. Some went to learn with Rav Soloveitchik. RIETS-YU was a Litvish bastion. Can anyone imagine bringing in a Chassidic Rebbe like this in those days? It seems unthinkable.

Of course, there have been many individuals from Chassidic backgrounds at RIETS/YU over the years, but they did not come in wearing their Chassidism on their sleeve, or as a Chassidic Rebbe, as Rabbi Weinberger is, with a mandate (actual or perceived) to openly spread Chassidism there. On the other hand, Rabbi Weinberger is openly, clearly, and quickly showing, front and center, no bones about it, that his agenda is to do just that. That is clear from various indications, such as his starting a new introduction to toras haba'al shem tov shiur in his first few days on the job (in which he announces that he will be learning from shiurim of R. Mottel Zilber, a son in law of the aforementioned Rav Moshe Wolfson, in the coming weeks) as well as his speaking in typical Chassidic style. What do I mean by the latter? Let me explain with a few examples. 

1) His usage of the term 'tzaddikim' as a synonym-euphemism-codeword for Chassidic leaders, as opposed to non Hassidic gedolim (you might find some rare exceptions, but they prove the rule. If you have doubts, listen to his talks online)..

2) His usage of the term 'seforim hakedoshim'  as a synonym-euphemism-codeword for Chassidic seforim. However, 'regular' seforim of Torah are not called that. Do they not qualify as being holy?

3) When he refers to Hassidic leaders, he typically will say 'zechuso yogein aleinu' (their merit should protect us). However, non Chassidic leaders do not get that appended to their name.

The above are typical among Chassidic speakers of his type, but it is surprising to hear such exclusionary and discriminatory language used at the bastion of Modern Orthodoxy which is YU-RIETS, without protest.

 Some may say, perhaps he is acting as a traditional Yeshiva mashgiach, just drawing somewhat on his Hassidic background for insights at times, so what is the big deal? However, as per the above, we see that that is not so. His Chassidism is not incidental and in the background, but rather his main identity, and front and center in his activities. Although he is also teaching from other works not commonly considered Chassidic (though that classification may be less than totally correct), such as seforim of Rav Kook and Rav Charlap, nevertheless it is through a Chassidic lens and as a Chassidic Rebbe, using Chassidic lingo that he does so. It is clear that he is acting as a Hassidic Rebbe, and engaged in hafotzas hamaayanos (spreading Hassidism) at YU. He is a believer in Chassidism and believes that spreading it will bring Moshiach closer. So he is trying to do that, aka hafatzas hamaayanos, in his new post.

It will be interesting to see how this new experiment will work out, for sure. Will he succeed in spreading Hassidism in RIETS-YU in a large way, or will the novelty of a Chassidic Rebbe on campus wear off over time, with Litvish remaining the dominant form of Yiddishkeit there? Will the new Chassidic way endure, or will it just be passing fad?

Time will tell. Stay tuned.

כתיבה וחתימה טובה

P.S. Much additional thought provoking background and incisive analysis on these new developments from present and past YU types can be seen here. 

How a Rebbe Can Build Happy and Healthy Talmidim - Rav Moshe Weinberger שליט"א

One of the panelists at a session at the recent Agudath Israel of America convention related to mental health was Rav Moshe Weinberger shlit"a, veteran Rebbe and Agudah Rav in Brooklyn, NY, as well as a longtime summer camp head counselor.

I would like to share some of his wisdom, wit, and good humor here.

"Today every Rebbe knows that he's in charge of the mental health of his talmidim." (3:15 -).

(Partially translated from Yiddish) My father didn't have time to have OCD, my father didn't have time to think if he had self esteem or not (36:50).

Today there is tremendous pressure.

On what a Rebbe can do to prevent mental issues 53:05 -

Rav Weinberger shlit"a commented with regard to three common conditions - self esteem, anxiety, and depression.

Self esteem - You have to acknowledge and relate to the children as individuals (check out the recording for details and examples).

Anxiety - With regard to tests, he says to students, it is a mark on the paper, not a mark on you. He will never write a failing mark on a paper. One of his fellow Rabbeim refers to tests as חזרה.

Depression - Speaks of the greatness of the sefer מסילת ישרים, it teaches that everyone is measured with their own measuring stick, and competition is only with what you can be.

The classroom and the house have to be happy places.

Torah was built in the United States with simcha, passion, vigor, and optimism (in name of his Rebbe, Rav Avrohom Chaim Levin z"l, who was just niftar) (57:40).

May we be zoche to have more Rabbeim like Rav Weinberger shlit"a, and to hear more of his wisdom and wit, לאורך ימים ושנים טובות.

(For more flavor and detail, check out the recording.)

Yeshiva University Neo-Chasidic Leaders Gather at Last Chabad-Lubavitch Rebbe's Tomb

Yesterday, members of the Chabad-Lubavitch faith around the world marked the 121st birthday of their late last spiritual leader, Rebbe M.M. Schneerson. Many of them did so by visiting his grave in New York City.

While that serves as a pilgrimage site for Lubavitchers, it also receives other visitors at times, who come for various reasons, such as politicians, who kowtow to the Chasidic sect in that manner in hope of winning political support, as well as friends, sympathizers, and fellow-travelers of it. Chabad-Lubavitch promotes visits to the tomb by the public at large as well, by framing it as a holy place, through which people can attain various types of salvation and good fortune. The more people that go there, the greater the PR for Chabad and their Rebbe that Lubavitch toils so diligently at.

Recently, a group of people affiliated with Yeshiva University made such a visit (a while ago we wrote about the relationship of Neo-Chasidus & Chabad, which we characterized as a relationship of closeness & distance). Among those making the trek were YU mashpia and Neo-Chasidic leader Rebbe Moshe Weinberger, Aish Kodesh Rebbe of Woodmere, NY, YU Judaic studies faculty member R. Reuven Boshnack, a protege of his, R. Efrem Goldberg, of BRS, prominent YU alumnus, with a group of his congregants, who were visiting the NY area then, and (surprisingly), R. Aryeh Leibowitz, of the RIETS/YU semicha program.

It is part of an increased closeness between some of the Modern Orthodox/YU comunity and Chabad-Lubavitch in recent years, fed by a sustained Lubavitch PR campaign trying to convince the MO that they are closer to Lubavitch than they actually were in the past.

Examining the photographic record of the visit can shed some light on the state of YU/MO-Chabad-Lubavitch relations now, as well as additional other matters.

Here we see Rebbe Weinberger at a tisch at the Chabad-Lubavitch tomb complex with the visitors.

Here we see some of them at the actual gravesite.

What is noteworthy is that basically, the YU/MO group is keeping to itself, staying apart from the Lubavitchers at the site. As if they are genuflecting to the late Rebbe, but staying apart from his living followers there.

It was interesting to see Rebbe Weinberger at the tomb. As we noted previously, he personally has deep connections with Lubavitch going back many years, and spent much time at their 770 headquarters years ago, including at gatherings with their late Rebbe. On the other hand, his congregation, which fairly often hosts other Hasidic speakers, leaders, performers, and personalities, such as R. Mottel Zilber, a Stuchiner Rebbe, R. Tzvi Meir Zilberberg, various people connected to Breslov, among others, seems to have a total lack, or at least a dearth of Lubavitchers so featured, the lack of which is quite telling.

R. Efrem Goldberg of BRS, who led the interesting BRS Mevakshim tour that brought his group there, although typically thought of as a prominent MO rabbi rather than a neo-Chasidic leader, has close ties with Rebbe Weinberger, whom he enthusiastically promotes, in addition to longstanding ties with the New Square Chasidic sect, and Chabad-Lubavitch, among others.

Another quite notable aspect of the gathering was, when Rebbe Weinberger and his entourage turned to enthusiastically sing and dance משנכנס אדר מרבין בשמחה there, in a departure from ordinary accepted behavior at the location. I guess it is related to Rebbe Weinberger's doing and encouraging such at other cemeteries and graves in his travels with followers a few months ago, which can be clearly seen in videos posted (for example, in Tzfas, in Teveria, and elsewhere). Is Rebbe Weinberger trying to normalize such a radical break with age-old tradition, to normalize singing and dancing in cemeteries? Perhaps he should try it at the resting place of the Satmar Rebbe R. Joel Teitelbaum, to whom he also had some sort of connection allegedly, as well, and see how the natives receive it there. Personally, I don't think such actions are wise, as Shlomo Hamelech warned, ופרץ גדר ישכנו נחש.

As we approach Pesach, a time where מסורה, tradition, and מנהגים are so central and emphasized, we should keep in mind that those categories are integral and vital to Yiddishkeit as a whole, year-round, and not just to that great יום טוב.

In the zechus of staying faithful, may we be zoche to a great Yom tov.

חג כשר ושמח

R. Moshe Wolfson, Chasidic Evangelist, and Chabad-Lubavitch Chasid, Passes Away

R. Moshe Wolfson, a Mashgiach in Yeshiva Torah Vodaath in New York (a mixed Hasidic-Litvish yeshiva, containing elements of both), spiritual leader of Cong. Emunas Yisroel, and prominent Chasidic advocate, passed away last week.

It was interesting to see the coverage in different frum media following his petirah. While some (e.g. Matzav and "Yated") tried to present him as a more mainstream figure, playing down his ardent Hasidism and connections to Chabad-Lubavitch, by being a perceptive observer, as well as viewing other outlets, one could get a more accurate and complete picture of his life and legacy.

                           R. Moshe Wolfson and Chabad-Lubavitch

While it is true that R. Wolfson was influenced by, and maintained ties with multiple Hasidic courts and groups (as was stated at the levaya by a maspid, that he was called 'the nosher' in his youth, as he went to multiple Hasidic Rebbes), nevertheless he had greater ties to some than others. And it is clear that he was very influenced by and connected to Chabad-Lubavitch, and their late leader, as we shall explain.

Chabad-Lubavitch websites had a great amount of coverage on R. Wolfson after his passing, quite unusual for a someone not officially a Lubavitcher. It is clear that they considered him to be very close to them, a fellow traveler, real friend, steadfast ally, if not actually one of their own literally.

I would like to clearly lay out some of the deep connections between Chabad-Lubavitch and R. Wolfson.

1) Stress on the foundational work of the Chabad-Lubavitch faith, Likutei Amarim, aka Tanya. R. Wolfson gave shiurim on it for years, and his congregation disseminated them prominently.

2) He visited and interacted with the late last Chabad-Lubavitch Rebbe over decades, displaying great subservience to him. 

3) He participated in Chabad-Lubavitch events for years, speaking for them at public gatherings, which he did not do for others.

4) He visited the grave of their last Rebbe often. A recent Chabad-Lubavitch advertisement even claims that he promoted prayer at that tomb with superlative language (source).

5) He went to their headquarters ("770") and davened in their late Rebbe's room, many years after his passing.

Some selected sources:

A Lubavitcher Remembers Reb Moshe Wolfson - Anash.org

Rabbi Moshe Wolfson, 99, OBM (collive.com)

Based on the above, there are definitely firm and ample grounds for describing R. Wolfson as a Chabad-Lubavitch Chasid, as a Lubavitcher writer and YouTuber described him.

The deep connection between him and Chabad continued with his son, the leader of Emunas Yisroel of Monsey, New York. 

A recent Chabad-Lubavitch advertisement even claims that he promoted prayer at that tomb in superlative language.

UPDATE: A grandson of R. Moshe, son of his Monsey son evidently, joined the Chabad-Lubavitch faith, attending their school in Kfar Chabad. He shared some interesting information on X, for example, that his grandfather was very supportive of that move, and insisted on paying the Tomchei Temimim tuition for him there, that his grandfather said that he was a walnut (big nut) for not going more often to the late Lubavitcher Rebbe, and about his visits to the tomb of their late leader.

Why am I not surprised? As the old saying goes, the apple doesn't fall far from the tree.

                     R. Moshe Wolfson and Modern Orthodoxy

Another important aspect of R. Wolfson's life and legacy was his Hasidic evangelism, which reached beyond his local community, stretching even to the Modern Orthodox world, either directly or via people like his son-in-law, R. Mottel Zilber, Toldos-Yehudah Stuchin Rebbe, who has close to ties to Cong. Aish Kodesh of YU Mashpia R. Moshe Weinberger, and people like R. Hershel Reichman and his son R. Zev Reichman of Yeshiva University, leaders of the Neo-Chasidus movement.

May we be zoche to clarity, knowledge, and understanding, so we are able to make necessary הבדלות, separations and distinctions, and keep apart things that should not be mixed.

Should a Jew dance on Tisha Be'Av? Examining a Chasidic story

Rabbi Moshe Weinberger, Rabbi of Cong. Aish Kodesh in Woodmere, NY, and Mashpia at Yeshiva University, tells the following story every year to his congregation when Tisha be'Av comes around (heard from Rabbi Weinberger). You can hear it here, around 16-17 minutes into the recording.

The Koidenover Rebbe (he uses the term Koidenover tzadik, but I think it means the same thing here) used to dance on Tisha Be'Av. His puzzled Chasidim asked him about it. He responded to them as follows. Tisha be'Av there is a mitzvah to be be'aveilus (in mourning for the Beis Hamikdash). And we know that every mitzvah must be done besimcha (with joy). That is why I am dancing.

Now that is an interesting story, but the whole thing does not add up, due to the following

a) Do Rabbi Weinberger himself, and his congregation, dance on Tisha be'Av, and follow the way of the Koidenover Rebbe? If not, why not? If he holds it is correct, why not do so? And if he holds it is not correct, why does he repeat it every year?

b) According to this story, people should dance at a levaya (funeral), and burial as well, as well as when visiting a shiva house for nichum aveilim (condolence call). After all, those are mitzvos too. Do they do so?

Rabbi Weinberger states, regarding this story, that 'the Misnagdim bichlal can't hear it'. Well, maybe the Misnagdim can't hear it, because it doesn't add up, as above. So it is actually a praise for the Misnagdim, that they don't accept it!

It seems like this is another cute Chasidic story that should be discarded, as it doesn't add up. Even among Chasidim, I am not aware of anyone who actually follows the story and actually dances on Tisha Be'Av.

File it away in the recycle bin.

Cast Down the Viduy Booklets? Response to a Leading Neo-Hasidic Leader and Mashpia

What are וידוי booklets, you may ask?

Well, some years ago, some people who are מדקדק במצות (scrupulous in their observance of Hashem's commandments), in order to be mezakeh the rabbim (merit the public), to enhance the seasonal prayers and עבודה (Divine service) of the ימי תשובה, the season of repentance, published some small booklets, expounding on different forms of viduy recited in the season (an integral component of the teshuvah process), which are focused on in this time of the year, to make it more meaningful and relevant for those who seek such things.

An updated version of one that has been around for many years, is shown here. Another one, from Artscroll, can be seen here.

Fine and dandy you say, huh? Who could have a problem with that? However, to a prominent neo-Hasidic leader, for some reason, they are viewed not as a welcome enhancement, but as a serious problem. Rabbi Moshe Weinberger, Mashpia at Yeshiva University, Rabbi of Congregation Aish Kodesh in Woodmere, NY, and leader of the neo Hasidic movement, just came out with a scathing attack on such publications. In a gathering at his congregation a few days ago, he ridiculed them (relevant segments being at 69:40 mainly, as well as at 81:20). According to Weinberger they are problematic, because a person should not dwell too much on sin, rather they should concentrate on positive things, citing certain Hasidic teachings to that effect, particularly on the pasuk לב חכם לימינו ולב כסיל לשמאלו.

Now, there is some logic to that. Standard (non Hasidic) Jewish sources also warn against dwelling excessively on sins of the past. However, as part of the teshuvah (repentance) process we also have mitzvos of viduy which are intensified and focused on around the beginning of a new year. And Rabbi Weinberger himself mentions that in his talk. But then, he goes on to bash viduy booklets, which are useful aides for some people, adjuncts to do the mitzvos in a meaningful manner, going so far as to relate approvingly that when he got one as a youngster his father objected to it and threw it to the floor! He ridicules them to the delighted laughter of his Modern Orthodox audience.

To lash out at such legitimate and honorable works that are utilized by sincere Jews, ehrliche Yidden, is not appropriate in general, and certainly not for someone who (allegedly) is a big leader, and merits a signficant מחאה.

Ironically, it is the Hasidic nusach Sfard order of prayer, which is the nusach of Rabbi Weinberger and his congregation, which says viduy much more often than regular non-Hasidic Jews, having viduy as part of its daily weekday services through most of the year, while the nusach Ashkenaz used by non Hasidim, conversely, does not generally say it year round, but rather only at special times like תענתים and  עשרת ימי תשובה. The Vilna Gaon, the great Misnaged, limits it even further. According to the גר"א, viduy (the short אשמנו version, as well as the longer על חטא version) is only said once during daily selichos (as opposed to three times, as others commonly do), as well as only once per tefillah of Yom Kippur (e.g. once during maariv, once during shacharis, once during musaf, once during mincha). As opposed to others who say it an additional time per tefillah with the shliach tzibbur.

Sadly, this is not the first time that inappropriate rhetoric emanated from this personality. A previous case, discussed at this website in the past, was related to his speaking approvingly about dancing on Tisha Be'Av. Other cases, discussed elsewhere, include his wholesale bashing of kollelim. Even before that, he made other extreme statements that generated much controversy, and elicited criticism.

ב"ה it is never too late to repent, as long as people are alive. And for institutions who employ unworthy spiritual leaders, there is also room for rectifying past mistakes, and turning over a new leaf with new appropriate leadership. With the Richard Joel era winding down at YU, questionable initiatives and hires of his tenure should be reexamined as well.

May we all merit true teshuvah speedily.

Neo-Chasidus & Chabad - Closeness & Distance

 The Neo-Chasidus movement has garnered much attention in recent years. For some people it was a great surprise, seeming to have arisen suddenly, from the proverbial nowhere. They don't know what it really is, what its roots are, how to react to it. It is desirable, therefore, to spend some time examining its roots, to better understand where it came from, and what it represents.

A cute and clever moniker attached to it gives us an idea of what some of its main components are - חבקוק -ראשי תיבות חב"ד, ברסלב, (הרב אברהם יצחק) קוק, וי"א ג"כ (שלמה) קרליבך. In English, Chabakuk, standing for Chabad, Breslov, (Rav Avraham Yitzchak) Kook, (Shlomo) Carlebach).

The Chabad component, which comes first in this sobriquet, is indeed a great foundation of Neo-Chasidus. If not first and foremost, definitely one of the great parts of it.

Let us look at the deep connection between Chabad-Lubavitch and Neo-Chasidus, starting with some background on some of the leading personalities of the movement.

Rabbi Moshe Weinberger of Woodmere, NY, is perhaps the leader of the movement in the English speaking world. Though he is of Hungarian Jewish background, he has a deep connection to Chabad-Lubavitch. Starting in his teens, when he was introduced to it by a local businessman who took him other local teens to Farbrengens in Crown Heights, in the early 1970's למספרם (Bashevkin interview, 14:50-). He was drawn to it "like a magnet", in his words, and spent much time at their headquarters, hanging out at 770 Eastern Parkway for years, attending farbrengens, and learning a lot of Chabad Chasidus. He has related that at one time he "was probably very, very close to becoming a Lubavitcher Chasid" himself. Later, he spent much time at a Chabad-Lubavitch outreach center, Heichal Menachem, in the Boro Park section of Brooklyn, where he heard many shiurim from the late Chabad-Lubavitch mashpia, R. Yoel Kahn. He davens from a Nusach Ari (Chabad-Lubavitch) siddur. He regularly lights a public Chabad-Lubavitch menorah during Chanukah in the Five Towns area of NY. All those years of deep Lubavitch connection and engagement left a profound impression on him and his thinking, even if he doesn't call himself a Lubavitcher now.

Rebbe Judah Mischel, a disciple of Rebbe Weinberger, is a well-known disseminator of Neo-Chasidus via his positions at Camp HASC, NCSY, writings, and speeches. He is also the son of a Chabad-Lubavitch mekurav (and here). In recent years he has visited Crown Heights, meeting and conferring with Lubavitch leaders, and later tweeting about it (as reported here previously, though the tweet referenced was later deleted).

R. Yussie Zakutinsky, leader of a Neo-Chasidic congregation in Lawrence, student at Rabbi Weinberger's Emek Hamelech kollel, also has a family background closely connected to Chabad-Lubavitch.

All of the above are heavily influenced by Chabad-Lubavitch.

The Chabad-Lubavitch influence on Neo-Chasidus is not just theological however.

Another aspect is seen in stories and music used by it. Here is one good example, that covers both the music and theology departments, Neo-Chasidim dancing enthusiastically to a signature Chabad-Lubavitch song. Many Lubavitch songs are sung in Neo-Chasidic circles.

Interestingly, though, despite the deep ties and influence, there is a significant element of distance and tension in the relationship between Neo-Chasidus and Chabad-Lubavitch nevertheless, that is worth noting. And that is, due to the fact that despite pleasure on the Chabad-Lubavitch side to see some Modern Orthodox and others turning in a Chasidic direction via Neo-Chasidus, they are still disappointed that they have not become Lubavitchers. In the Chabad-Lubavitch view, they are the highest form of Chasidus, and their Rebbe is the נשיא הדור, leader of the generation. While Neo-Chasidus draws deeply upon Chabad-Lubavitch, they do not feel bound to and by it, and imbibe from other Hasidic streams as well.

The component of Chabad-Lubavitch in Neo-Chasidus is not something small that could perhaps be (figuratively) בטל בששים, nullified when heavily outweighed. It is an עיקר, a large, main component, and also נותן טעם, imparting much flavor. So in a way, it (Neo-Chasidus) could be considered a branch or offshoot of Chabad-Lubavitch (perhaps similar to the מלאכים Chasidic group of Williamsburg in NY). People should keep that in mind when considering the movement.

May הקב"ה help us see things clearly, as they actually are, to reach the correct conclusions about them, and approach things with the proper מהלך.

א גוטען חודש

Tisha Be'Av Kumzitz - The New Normal?

An advertisement for a Tisha Be'Av night Kumzitz (along with another one the following day) came to my attention recently, and I was quite surprised to see it. The congregation offering it is neo-Chasidic congregation on Long Island, NY, under the leadership of a Rabbi Yussie Zakutinsky, a close disciple of Rabbi Moshe Weinberger of Woodmere, NY (mashpia at Yeshiva University, and Rabbi of Congregation Aish Kodesh).

Note - I subsequently learned that Congregation Aish Kodesh of Rabbi Weinberger had their own kumzitz on Tisha Be'Av night, although it was not advertised as the Lawrence congregation one was. A video of it, with Eitan Katz, can be seen here.

Now the three weeks period, between the observances of יז תמוז and ט אב, can be a challenging time for many people. Especially in the COVID-19 era. For Chasidim and Neo-Chasidim, it can be even more so, since they put so much stress on שמחה.

It seems that for years Tisha Be'Av 'kumzitz'en of sorts have taken place on/around Tisha Be'Av in Eretz Yisroel, especially around the כותל המערבי. However, it seems that they were usually done by groups like NCSY, and also more toward the end of Tisha Be'Av, rather than in the beginning of it. Now by longstanding widespread custom, toward the the end of Tisha Be'Av, there is a shift in the mood, for example, after חצות היום most people sit regularly rather than down low, so such things are not so surprising toward the end of the day. However, to see it advertised in a Shul setting for the beginning of Tisha Be'Av, and in חוץ לארץ too, was surprising.

Another such innovation, coming from the same or similar circles it seems, is to sing together אני מאמין באמונה שלמה בביאת המשיח on Tisha Be'Av night after davening. I have seen that practiced at Cong. Aish Kodesh in Woodmere of the aforementioned Rabbi Weinberger.

Now we can assume that people have good intentions with these innovations. But nevertheless, the question can be raised, are they a good idea, and consistent with our מסורה?

Personally, I don't think so, I think they are definitely a departure.

An excellent article related to this was written a few years ago by Prof. Chaim Saiman.

If people feel an overwhelming need to do such things, esp. in a congregation of youngsters, or a kiruv group, perhaps there is room for leniency for some singing under rabbinic guidance. But does it need to be labeled as a kumzitz and formalized?  To institutionalize them, especially at the very outset of the day, seems problematic.

Additionally, the idea of singing together of אני מאמין באמונה שלמה בביאת המשיח on Tisha Be'Av night after davening seems inconsistent with the theme and mood then, which seems to be describing and bemoaning the terrible, massive חורבן and calling for תשובה, repentance, to remedy the great breach that developed between הקב"ה and כלל ישראל. But if people start singing then that they believe in the coming of משיח no matter what, even if he tarries, that seems to dilute and take the focus and urgency away from תשובה as the answer to חורבן and גלות, because it is implied that משיח is coming anyway.

Those are some thoughts that came to me when contemplating these matters. תורה היא וללמוד אנו צריכים.

May we be זוכה to תשובה שלמה and גאולה שלמה, בקרוב.

Mishpacha Joins Neo-Chasidus P.R. Campaign

Mishpacha magazine (The English version. For Wikipedia's take, including the original Hebrew side, see here), for those who are unaware, is a glossy, high-level publication aimed at the upscale, affluent, (allegedly) sophisticated frum community that has become popular with some in recent years.

When perusing such publications, however, it behooves us to recall the admonition of רבי in Pirkei Avos, אל תסתכל בקנקן אלא במה שיש בו, do not gaze at the container, but rather at what is inside it (like the English expression "don't judge a book by its cover"). The fact that a publication is printed on glossy paper, with beautiful graphics, does not mean that everything in it is true, correct, and free of bias.

Recently, in their Shavuos issue, one of the main articles/features was related to the frum Neo-Hasidism movement. Typical of such pieces, it paints the frum world as being void of depth and spirituality, with Rabbi Moshe Weinberger, Rabbi Judah Mischel, & Co. riding up on white horses (donkeys?) to redeem them from their wretched existence with Chasidus, which turns into an unstoppable mass movement, where people become Chasidic and live happily ever after. It gives a breathless report or impression of people allegedly running to learn Chasidus all over, with Chasidic books piled up on every Beis Medrash table.

The problem is however, that it just isn't so in the real world.

The article seems to claim that the movement is conquering the Modern Orthodox/Dati Leumi world (quite debatable of course - growth is not the same as taking something over), but tries to give the impression that the same thing is happening in the Charedi world as well, by talking about one Beis Medrash in Kiryat Sefer (but what about all the others in Kiryat Sefer and elsewhere that are not doing so?). Lemayseh, not only are Tanyas not generally piled up on the tables of the greatest non-Hasidic yeshivas, they are also not piled up on the tables of great Chasidic ones either! In Satmar yeshivas they don't learn Tanya - a bochur might get expelled for doing so. In Sanz, bochurim don't learn Chasidus bichlal either (they want to them to concentrate on regular limudim). I don't think Bobov, Belz, Vizhnitz, Ger, or Skver are much, if at all, different in that regard. And those are just some examples.

Actually, if you look into it, the Mishpacha article is sort of an updated version of an article that appeared on the subject in the O-U's Jewish Action magazine a few years ago. It is clear that the two are closely related by the fact that they have so many things in common, from stories related to multiple personalities featured.

I wonder how the women who wrote the articles supposedly know that tables in batei medrash all over are piled up with Tanyas. Did they perhaps dress up as men, a la Yentl the yeshiva bachur, and take a survey of yeshiva tables? Or did they just get that from the Neo-Chasidus P.R. Dept.?

One also wonders how accurate the article is when it gets some elementary facts wrong (e.g. it is Rabbi Moshe Tzvi Weinberg, not Weinberger, and Rabbi Binyomin Eisenberger is not a Chasidishe Rebbe - his background is Oberlander Hungarian, dress is Litvish, he learned in Litvish yeshivas, I believe he doesn't even wear a gartel, even if he might flirt with some aspects of Chasidism).

At least the O-U article devoted some some space to criticism, incorporated some critical views, while the Mishpacha one hardly does so.

A good percentage of the Mishpacha staff is Chasidic or has significant Chasidic ties (even if they don't always wear it on their sleeve - see their Shuls supplement this past Pesach for more, for starters), so naturally they like to publish such pieces. And it is not just one piece. Related pieces have continued for weeks, and tweets are also part of the campaign.

Another problem with these pieces is their equating "penimiyus haTorah" - inner Torah - with Chasidus. So all non-Chasidim are engaged in externalities, their Torah and mitzvos are external because they don't learn Tanya, huh? Zeyer shein, very nice, how beautiful and generous of them.

With regard to פנימיות התורה (an expression that comes from Lubavitch I think) - an expression used for סודות התורה and other hidden things comes to mind which may be quite fitting here as well - those who talk, don't know, and those who know, don't talk.

Bottom line - good P.R. piece, but reality and P.R. is not necessarily one and the same thing.

Caveat emptor.

The Litvak Caveman - Modern Historical Development of a Polemical Stereotype

Years ago, a controversy erupted when a past President of Yeshiva University and Rosh Yeshiva of RIETS, in an attempt to delineate and distinguish between his yeshiva and those of the more right wing Yeshiva world, stated, that unlike at some other institutions, his students were not cavemen.

Some right wing Yeshiva world elements then reacted with furor, seemingly thinking that the caveman reference was to a neanderthal type creature. Actually, however, the learned speaker and masterful darshan was referring to the famous gemara that tells of R. Shimon ben Yochai and his son R. Elazar staying for years buried in earth in a cave, when they were fugitives from governmental tyranny and religious persecution, with the speaker meaning that his students interacted with the outside world more than those of more insular institutions.

Over time, that speaker retired from Yeshiva University, and the controversy became a piece of history, past rather than present, for a while.

More recently however, the caveman stereotype has reemerged in a new form, with Hasidic figures at YU and elsewhere invoking it more broadly, not just against YU's right wing rival yeshivas, but as a rhetorical tool against Litvaks in general.

In the new form, Litvaks are carricatured as monkish types who do not engage with, or even reject the world, rather remaining isolated studying Torah all day. In other words, unbalanced people, who's lifestyle is a departure from Jewish tradition. On the other hand, Chasidim are portrayed favorably as people who engage with the outside world rather than cower from it, who believe in בכל דרכיך דעהו.

Exhibit one of this new form of the polemic - A few years ago, Rabbi Moshe Weinberger, Rabbi of Cong. Aish Kodesh, and RIETS Mashpia, basing himself on Rabbi Mottel Zilber (aka Rabbi Mordechai Silver), a (one of two) Stutchiner Rebbe (son-in-law of Rabbi Moshe Wolfson, spiritual leader of Cong, Emunas Yisrael of Brooklyn, NY, and mashgiach of Yeshiva Torah Vodaath of Brooklyn), attempted to propagate it in a talk at YU, under a guise of 'A Chasidic View of Parnasah', as part of his 'introduction to תורת הבעש"ט' series there.

Exhibit two - Rabbi Hershel Reichman, RIETS Rosh Yeshiva and neo-Hasidic pioneer, in a just published message, reflecting on neo-Hasidism at YU/RIETS (interestingly he expresses some reservations about it there now, entertaining the possibility that it has gone too far), says (last paragraph) that Hasidism is a seamless fit with Modern Orthodoxy, because they both see opportunities for avodas Hashem in every area of life, as per the fundamental Torah teaching of בכל דרכיך דעהו. As if Litvaks have excised that from their Yiddishkeit!

What is the problem here? Does anyone else realize what is wrong with this rhetoric? May I suggest a few points to ponder.

1) Litvaks as a whole are being conflated with a certain type of modern yeshiva/kollel (long term/indefinite "Torah-only" study for the masses) lifestyle, and its constituency.  As if such a thing ever existed in Lita, Jewish Lithuania, the 'old country' for them where the amount of kollel students pre-WWII did not even get close to three digits, and where the typical man, with rare exception, was a 'balabos' (בעל הבית) rather than a kollel yungerman. The fact is, though, that Litvish in general is not totally identical with Yeshivish. Yes, there is overlap, and common cause, and collaboration at times, but they are still distinct identities and categories.

2) Chasidim nowadays have gone into kollel in a big way, and now have some of the largest kollelim in the world (in Kiryas Joel, New Square, etc.).

3) Pre-WWII Chasidim had similar things to kollel, even if the term was not used by them (e.g. the famous Belzer 'yoshvim' system).

4) Many of the most extremely insular segments of the contemporary Jewish world are actually Chasidic communities.

5) I don't recall this argument/polemic being raised in the days of when the Chasidic-Misnagdic clash was in full swing 200+ years ago. Chasidim then did not (IIRC) accuse Litvaks of being monk-like cavemen. Why not? Simple. Because it would have been ludicrous. There was no such thing! There was no kollel movement in Lita, Jewish Lithuania and environs, at that time, in the time of the Vilna Gaon! It is a modern invention, which became a mass movement only in recent decades. That itself shows that there is a problem with a polemic linking such a lifestyle to core Litvak ideology and identity.

I wonder, would Rabbi Reichman have proclaimed such drivel in front of his late rebbe Rav Soloveitchik z"l, or Rabbi Weinberger in front of his (alleged - I don't know if I have ever heard him say over Torah from the Suvalker Rav z"l despite listening to quite a few of his talks - if he ever does, it definitely seems to be quite rare) rebbe Rav Dovid Lifshitz z"l, and other past Litvishe RIETS greats? I seriously doubt it. Now, however, after their passing, these people feel free to spout anti-Litvish rhetoric openly in the institution where their teachers taught Torah for so many years.

Let us speak out strongly against this grotesque carricature of the Litvak being propagated by some to promote aims of their own, in which the Litvak is a Christian monk like figure, who doesn't believe in בכל דרכיך דעהו.

It is time for this defamation campaign to be exposed and retracted. The contemporary figures propagating it should be challenged for their words, and held accountable for the ugly stereotyping. Issues can be debated, but leave the broad brush stereotyping out please. Hopefully those responsible will consider their words more carefully in the future, and refrain from such talk, restoring a measure of peace among us.

Extreme Hotspots - Kivrei Tzadikim In Contemporary Neo-Chasidus

Rabbi Moshe Weinberger, Yeshiva University mashpia, and Rabbi of Cong. Aish Kodesh in Woodmere, recently traveled with a group of his followers to burial sites of Chasidic leaders in Europe, before continuing on to the land of Israel.

In one of his talks during the trip, at the grave of the founder of the Chasidic movement, which was recently featured prominently (at the landing page, first page you see when visiting the site) at yutorah.org, he stated (11:40-) (reading from a writeup related to a R. Yosef Dayan of Eretz Yisrael) that

"One hour of Torah and tefillah at the burial site of a tzadik, he used to say, is equivalent to hundreds of such hours in a Beis HaMedrash."

Rabbi Weinberger is viewed as the leader of the neo-Chasidus movement, so his words are significant.

A few things strike me as particularly significant about the statement - 1) the statement is not qualified, e.g. if a person is at the highest level, prepared for the experience thoroughly, but is given as a blanket statement, 2) in addition to the extremely high multiplier effect claimed, the mere fact of quantifying the matter, 3) the mention of learning at the site, in addition to davening.

Is this in line with mainstream Chasidic theology nowadays?

It comes across as quite extreme, even for Chasidim. Do other Chasidim nowadays make such statements? It is one thing to say that praying at such places is powerful, but to quantify such claims, saying they are hundreds of times more powerful than doing the same things elsewhere? Not doubly as powerful, thrice as powerful, or four times as powerful. Hundreds of times as powerful. That is quite a claim.

I suspect that in this, as well as with some other things, neo-Chasidus is outdoing much, if not all, of old Chasidus.

It is not Rav Soloveitchik's Modern Orthodoxy for sure.

The Search for Meaning & Passion in Neo-Chasidus - Testing the Limits of Tradition

In the past, when questions were raised about Neo-Chasidus, a response given was along the lines of we do things the same way you do, except that we also want to have a relationship with Hashem (as if regular Yidden don't have such a relationship ר"ל).

And perhaps in the past they were more careful not to innovate in the area of practice. But lately they seem to be more feeling more confident, and more questionable practices are being seen.

Two recent examples illustrate this point quite clearly.

Firstly, ט' אב services at a congregation on Long Island, NY.

In the previous post, before 9 Av, we discussed the advertised Tisha Be'Av kumzitz

I figured that I should check firsthand to see what was going on, בשעת מעשה, at the places I wrote about, after all, that is only proper, as Rashi brings in בראשית.

When I checked out the תשעה באב morning קינות at Congregation KMH, led by Rabbi Yussie Zakutinsky, a close disciple (he is one of a few carefully chosen founding members of Rabbi Weinberger's new Kollel Emek Hamelech) of Yeshiva University Mashpia and Rabbi of Congregation Aish Kodesh of Woodmere, NY, Rabbi Moshe Weinberger, with assistance from talented singer Joey Newcomb, I discovered even more than I was expecting.

The abbreviated קינות service was accompanied by a significant amount of singing. And that does not mean that they just sang בצאתי ממצרים and אלי ציון a little more than in other places. Rather there were actual distinct songs between קינות.  You don't have to take my word for it, you can see for yourself, via the links below.

Selection one.

Selection two.

Selection three.

Selection four.

Selection five.

Selection six.

Selection seven.

Selections eight, nine, and ten.

Selection eleven.

Definitely very different than typical ט' אב services at both Non-Chasidic and Chasidic congregations.

The second example is the recent extensive singing (for almost an hour) at the funeral of the well known Lubavitcher scholar and writer, Rabbi Adin Steinsaltz. Perhaps it could even be called a funeral farbrengen. 

As with the first example, this is something that is not typically seen at such events, whether typical Chasidic or Non Chasidic ones. Neo-Chasidus is doing its own thing.

I like the idea of doing things with more כוונה, and making observances more meaningful. But does that give an unlimited carte blanche license for innovation? I don't think so.

May הקב"ה give us the wisdom to infuse our observances with meaning and passion without transforming them excessively.

Gauging the State of Chabad-Lubavitch: The Evidence from their 19 Kislev Holiday

 The Chabad-Lubavitch faith, a Chasidic sect, is well-known due to their extensive PR (public relations) campaigns and media presence over many years. Due to their outsized, disproportionate, and one might say incessant, PR, they are at times more known and recognized than other religious groups who are larger and more important than them, but are less engaged in such self-promotion. Too many naive and ignorant people even think that they represent mainstream Orthodox Judaism, or mainstream Chasidism, a great misconception encouraged and promoted by them.

But how large and strong actually are they, beyond the noise and publicity they generate?

A Measuring Stick

A major (perhaps the main) holiday in the Chabad-Lubavitch faith (I saw recently somewhere that they have twenty two holidays of their own, commemorating things like their Rebbes being released from prison, as well as their birthdays, wedding, and death anniversaries, but some are stressed more than others) is the nineteenth day of the Jewish month of Kislev, aka Yud Tes Kislev, which they refer to as Rosh Hashanah LaChasidus, the new year of Hasidism. Through examination of reports of celebrations of it this past week, we can, with Hashem's help, get an idea of their actual strength, which will take us beyond the fluff and puff of their publicity to the actual reality of things.

Let us look at a few examples -

1) Kfar Chabad - the Chabad-Lubavitch center in ארץ ישראל, this town holds a large celebration then. Looking at the photos, there seem to be hundreds in attendance, seemingly in the low hundreds. What does a Lubavitcher website report, however? They claim that there were thousands there. Clearly untrue and wildly exaggerated, based on the posted photos there.

2) Bnei Brak - in this ultra-orthodox center, there seem to be less than one hundred in attendance at their event, which is very underwhelming turnout, that speaks very loudly in terms of showing how marginal the Chabad-Lubavitch faith is there. Nevertheless, the Chabad website claims that six hundred joined it. Now I know that many in Chabad-Lubavitch are weak in secular studies, but how does one hundred become six hundred? It seems to be a deliberate deception, an attempt to inflate their importance.

3) Manchester - examination of photos seems to show perhaps 50-60 in attendance. A Chabad website, however, claims that two hundred were there.

3) Lakewood - A sizable event took place on Motzei Shabbos. The photographs show a crowd of perhaps a hundred, if that. A Lubavitch website however, claims that there were hundreds there, clearly not in accordance with what their photos show. Furthermore, the audience comprised many shtreimel wearers from other Chasidic groups, as well as visiting Lubavitchers. So it seems that non-Hasidic Litvish types were almost totally absent.

4) Y.U. - A Chabad website claims that over 250 YU students participated there. Examination of photos and video coverage, however, shows a much smaller number, perhaps around fifty (while there are more people than that, many are visiting Lubavitchers, rather than YU students, as evident by their different appearance. As reported at a different Lubavitch website, which gives a figure of thirty five visiting Lubavitcher bochurim that took part).

5) Brooklyn - An event in the Marine Park vicinity attracted perhaps 100-150 people, based on what the photographic evidence shows. However, a major Chabad website claims that over one thousand people were there, a giant exaggeration, a major untruth. 

Conclusions

1) Overwhelmingly, the greater Jewish community, the greater Orthodox Jewish community, and even the greater Chasidic community, does not recognize and celebrate this Chabad-Lubavitch holiday.

2) Some members of the neo-Chasidic community, springing from Modern Orthodoxy, with leaders such as Rebbe Moshe Weinberger of Yeshiva University, Aish Kodesh Rebbe of Woodmere, NY, Rebbe Judah Mischel of Camp HASC and NCSY, and Rebbe Moshe Tzvi Weinberg and Rebbe Hershel Reichman of YU, do celebrate it. No major surprise there, as we have written in the past of the closeness of this group to Chabad-Lubavitch.

3) The great efforts by Chabad-Lubavitch to promote this holiday of their faith by presenting events at sizable venues with leading singers, offering free music, food, and drink, have had only limited success in attracting new people to it. Many, if not most, of the new attendees are from the Neo-Chasidic group, Dati-Leumi or Modern Orthodox communities, and to a lesser extent Sephardim. There are grounds to assume that many of them are drawn more by the free entertainment, food, and drink, rather than ideological reasons. 

Bottom line - Chabad-Lubavitch is a lot less than many seem to think, and what they would like you to believe. By massive PR and frequent use of outright exaggeration and deception, they try to make themselves seem larger and more powerful than they actually are.

From the above we can and should extrapolate to Chabad overall, their organizations and activities in general, and not be foolish consumers who purchase the proverbial Brooklyn Bridge from them. Since they have been based in Brooklyn, NY for so many years they may have become experts in selling it to the unsuspecting and naive, but those of us with more knowledge need to be more wary of them, and warn others as well.

May light triumph over darkness, and truth win out over deception.

א פרייליכען חנוכה

A Litvak Looks at Reb Zadok Hakohein of Lublin and a Well-Known Teaching of His

(Today is the yahrzeit of Reb Zadok of Lublin, which makes it a good time to share some relevant thoughts.)

One of the Hasidic authors that has become popular among some in the wider Jewish world in recent decades is Reb Zadok of Lublin.

One big fan of Reb Zadok recently wrote a tribute to him, in which he claims that the line in Reb Zadok which people are mostly familiar with is his teaching that 'just as a man must believe in Hashem, he must believe in himself'. This fine writer, who described himself as having four American born grandparents and without any even remotely distant Hasidic relatives, describes how, hearing those words in his Modern Orthodox high school from neo-Hasidic leader Rabbi Moshe Weinberger, mashpia at Yeshiva University and Rabbi in Woodmere, turned him on to Reb Zadok/Hasidus (though he says that he is mainly interested in Reb Zadok, as opposed to Hasidism in general).

Now I have heard that before from others, that those words of Reb Zadok made a big impression on them. But I have some trouble understanding what the big deal is.

Didn't the משנה itself, eons before ר' צדוק, say that every person is obligated to say בשבילי נברא העולם, the world was created for me?

Don't believe me? Take a look at סנהדרין פרק ד (for greater clarity, see the words of רש"י there, either in a gemara volume - e.g. last Rashi, bottom of page - or in the תוספות יום טוב on the mishna).

So okay, Reb Zadok said a similar thing in a different way, but it seems that he basically reinvented the wheel here.

יגדיל תורה ויאדיר

Just don't tell me that he made the whole thing up יש מאין.

Chasidic Yeshiva Bochurim Banned From Attending Their Rebbe's Tish

Rav Yirmiyahu Kaganoff shlita, a poseik in Eretz Yisroel, has recently written some interesting words about a not so well known Polish gadol who lived in Baltimore, R. Michoel Forshlager z"l, in two installments.

In the second part, the following is stated

"in Sochatchov they did not allow the bachurei yeshivah to attend the tishin of the rebbe, since this would take away from their single-minded goal of growing in learning."

Sochatchov, a leading, and influential Polish Chasidic dynasty, was known for placing great emphasis on limud haTorah.

This is in contrast to what I heard a while ago from Rabbi Moshe Weinberger, mashpia at Yeshiva University, and Rabbi of Cong. Aish Kodesh in NY, in one of his lectures. He said there, in a talk about the Chasidic Shabbos, that as opposed to what outsiders might think, by Chasidim there was no thought that attending a tish could be a problem of bittul Torah (you can hear it here, at app. 18:50). Obviously, that was not correct. At least not in Sochatchov. And I suspect that Sochatchov was not the only place with such a position.

Moral of the story - caveat emptor - buyer beware. Be a critical consumer. Not everything that is stated out there is accurate.

P.S. I read a while ago of a similar thing in another Chasidus in the past as well (Sanzer?).

When A Chasidic Tale Clashes With Halacha - A Recent Account From Neo-Chasidism

About three years ago, at a Shabbos in Manhattan, a visiting Rabbi related an old Chasidic tale that left students in an uproar. It was Shabbos of parshas Mishpatim of 5774, and the location was Yeshiva University.

The visiting Rabbi told of a family who had two sons that were circumcised and died afterward due to it (perhaps due to what we call today hemophilia). In such a case, Jewish practice dictates that future sons are not circumcised, due to pikuach nefesh (the imperative to save and preserve life), as it assumed that they are also in mortal danger from a bris. However, in this case, in the Chasidic tale, a Chasidic Rebbe, Reb Pinchas of Koritz, visiting the area, noticed the young uncircumcised male child and asked about him. He was told that the child's brothers had died due to milah, so he was not circumcised, as above. Whereupon he said that the child would be alright, and that he himself would perform the bris milah on him the next day. So people got together the next day, and a bris milah was done. However, after the milah, the child was bleeding, and it could not be stopped, and it appeared that he would die like his brothers had before him. There was panic and despair in the air. Reb Pinchas walked outside where he encountered the Rebbe Reb Zushe, who was told about the situation, and said don't worry, I'll take care of it. He then went inside and said that everyone should sit down and eat, and things will be okay. During the meal, things came under control with the child's situation. Later on Reb Pinchas asked him how he knew that would solve the problem. He responded that it says in the pasuk (in Mishpatim, this week's portion) ויחזו את האלקים ויאכלו וישתו - when middas hadin, signified by the shem Elokim, is seen, one should eat and drink, show friendship to one another, and so on, and things will be okay.

The tale left some talmidim of the yeshiva very upset, as it appears to endorse going against halacha, and they protested to hanhalah about it.

Who was the visiting Rabbi at YU who told over the tale? It was Rabbi Moshe Weinberger, the then new mashpia of Yeshiva University, and rabbi of Congregation Aish Kodesh in NY, someone who has been written about here previously, due to other problematic statements and teachings of his.

One of the hanhalah members of YU commented that it is a Hasidic tale, and there is a saying of Chasidim themselves that 'anyone who believes all Chasidic stories is a fool...'.

(heard from reliable, well connected Yeshiva Rav Yitzchak Elchanan  sources)

Chasidic stories have a goal of promoting Chasidus and Chasidic leaders.

If eating and drinking is a way to solve all dangers to life, why wasn't/isn't it done it done to save other people as well?

Anyway, it is hard to understand such things.

For non-Chasidim, we don't have such problems. We know that we are supposed to follow halachah, and that is it.

Good Shabbos and a gutten Chodesh.

PSA: What's Behind the TYH Nation Movement?

 Thank you Hashem! הפעם אודה את ה.

A beautiful concept, and way to live. An attitude of gratitude, as the phrase coined by some clever person describes it.

When I first learned of this and saw their signature music video, I was quite impressed. They seemed to be doing good work, spreading a great message.

But then, over time, I saw more of what they were putting out, and started wondering more and more where they were coming from. Gradually, it dawned upon me, and I discovered more and more evidence to that effect, that it was another neo-Chasidus endeavor from the Five Towns area of NY, that hotbed of the movement.

A few illustrations.

1) In a recent video, a member of the family which started the TYH nation movement admits openly that it is about spreading Chasidus.

2) The singer Joey Newcomb, who is quite involved with them, seems to be quite involved with neo-Chasidus, at times with neo-Hasidic leader R. Yussi Zakutinsky (himself a close associate of senior neo-Hasidic leader Rabbi Moshe Weinberger of Woodmere, whose kollel he learns in).

3) A while ago they put out a song promoting the Chabad-Lubavitch doctrine that 'every Yid is a Chelek Eloka mimaal mamash', a doctrine that is outside of mainstream Orthodox theology, frequently misunderstood, and bordering on (if not outright) apikorsus R"L (for more on this important inyan, see this discussion online a while back).

4) Just a few days ago, they released a new music video "Every Yid's a Big Tzadik", based on a song and teaching of a Chasidic fellow from Brooklyn, NY, who is a Pre-1A Rebbe in a yeshiva there for many years, who some people call 'the Nikelsburger Rebbe'. The problem is, that it just ain't so, and is dangerously naive and misleading (it also goes against the Chabad-Lubavitch sefer Tanya, which says (AIUI) that most people are beinonim).

Anyway, based on the above, it is clear, that despite some cute songs and swag, caution is warranted and advised with regard to the TYH nation movement, שומר נפשו ירחק מהם, people concerned about their souls should keep a distance.

ולשומעים ינעם ותבוא עליהם ברכת הטוב

Neo-Chasidic Desecration of Cemeteries

In another inversion of Jewish tradition, to go along with their Tisha Be'Av kumzitzes, and festive Selichos before Rosh Hashanah, Neo-Chasidim have taken to - ר"ל - desecrating cemeteries, in particular resting places of great Jewish leaders, traditionally places of quiet repose, serious contemplation, and prayer, turning them into places of singing, music, and even dancing at times.

Here, we see a recent clip of such activity, with one of the leading Neo-Chasidus leaders, Rebbe Moshe Weinberger, of Woodmere, New York, USA, at a cemetery in ארץ ישראל. This is just a very recent example, by the way, but by no means the only one, as this antic has been already observed for a while among them during their various tours, including singing at the kever of the Chasam Sofer a while back, with accompanying guitar strumming and dancing.

Once again, we see how their claim that they don't change anything in Jewish practice, that they rather just add flavor and meaning, is false. This group is violating ancient traditions and halachos, with seemingly near impunity. They must be held accountable for these breaches. If they are not, who knows where they will end up, ר"ל. 

Let them try such things at places like the kevarim of the Satmar Rebbe(s), Gerrer Rebbe(s), Bobover Rebbe(s), or even Lubavitcher Rebbes, and see what happens. I think they would get a rude awakening, and a strong lesson in proper traditional cemetery behavior.

May הקב"ה send to them a spirit of repentance, a רוח תשובה, so they return to traditional Jewish practice. If that does not happen soon, Jewish leaders, rabbonim, and even laypeople, should make it very clear to them and the public at large that such deviations are not acceptable, and that they will be held accountable for them.