#chassidus

[etz-ashashiyot]

For those who would like to start your day with some crying in Jewish this fine morning, check out this video explanation for the backstory of this gorgeous niggun:

I've loved this niggun since I stumbled across it in 2023, but I never knew the story behind it, which is devastating but also is ultimately uplifting, in that his wisdom and words of Torah survived him and gave him a legacy that was otherwise ripped away from him.

[magicallysweetshelter]

[rabbiaharon]

בריך רחמנא דסעיין לי מריש ועד סוף

Shalom Aleichem! One of the deepest aspects of Elul, Selichos, Rosh Hashanah, Yom Kippur, and indeed the entirety of Tishrei is the reality of true Jewish unity, one which happens regardless of whether or not we are shomer shabbos, shomer kashrus, and shomer taharas hamishpocha… whether or not we are spiritually healthy, clean, and pure, or soiled, dirty, or, chas v’shalom, sick - and how much moreso those who are skirting the line between life and death every day of their lives. In Selichos we find many psukim which are normally written in singular (יהיו לרצון אמרי פי) and express them in plural (יהיו לרצון אמרי פינו) to indicate our unity with each other as we stand before Hashem.

This is expressed especially through the most sensitive times of Tishrei, on Rosh Hashana (where we beseech Hashem to accept OUR prayers in musaf), and on Yom Kippur (where we begin the entire davening by night with the words “with the permission of the heavenly court and the earthly court, we are henceforth allowed to pray alongside the transgressors”). It stands to reason that when it comes to anyone who is Jewish - either halachically Jewish by birth, or one who went through a proper orthodox conversion - it is more important than any other time of the year to judge them favorably and assume the best in them. Part of this may be assuming that a Jew who does not keep Torah simply was never taught how to fulfill aspects of the Torah, or that they never had the opportunity to learn (that they’re a tinuk shenishbe), and part of that may be assuming that they’ve gone through some trauma in their lives, or personal challenges that they are having difficulty overcoming, and that if we were in their situation, we may not do differently than they are.

This is expressed to the extreme in one of my favorite halachos (that I’ve come across so far), in Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh Deah 139:1). This section of Shulchan Aruch is the beginning of the laws concerning idolatry, and the extent of the prohibition thereof, and it begins by discussing the difference between idolatry that belongs to a Jew, and that which belongs to a non-Jew:

 Idolatry that belongs to a non-Jew is presumed prohibited to benefit or use from the point that it comes into their hands (or from the point that they make it, even though they have yet to bow down to it), but if they break it into pieces (and it’s no longer fit to worship), a Jew can benefit from the pieces. 

By contrast, idolatry that belongs to a Jew does not become prohibited to benefit from until they bow down to it (or commit any other act of idolatry that constitutes serving the idol), but once it has become prohibited, the materials will never become permitted to benefit from for a Jew - even if it has been broken - and must be disposed of in a permanent manner (such as dropping them off a boat in the middle of the sea, or burning them, and scattering the ashes in a place where they won’t benefit anyone).

 

The beautiful limud zchuss is in two essential parts as follows:

1) The Turei Zahav mentions that while in most cases, a Yehudi Mumar (a rebelling Jew, who violates certain prohibitions in public out of spite against G-d) is considered to be a non-Jew and cannot be relied upon for the Laws of Kashrus, Shabbos, or the like, and they cannot be called up to the Torah in shul, or counted for the minyan, in the case of the laws of idolatry, they are considered a Jew both for a leniency (their idolatry doesn’t become prohibited until it’s served) and for a stringency (their idolatry will never become permitted, even if they break it). The Turi Zahav concludes his thought; “Even though he is a sinner, he’s still a Jew.” 

2) The Remah adds on to the ruling of the Shulchan Aruch that if a Jew sets up an idol for the sake of idolatry, and a non-Jew bows down to it, it becomes prohibited to benefit from (even though a person generally cannot cause something that does not belong to them to become prohibited, since the Jew set up the idol for the purpose of idolatry, we have an exception to the rule). The Sifsei Kohen, commenting on the Remah’s ruling, says: “However, if the same non-Jew picks another idol from the house of the same Jew, stands it up, and bows down to it, it does not become prohibited, because perhaps the Jew only designated the idol he set up for idolatry for that purpose, but anything else in his house, he does not wish to use for that purpose.”

Regardless of the fact that this Jew is actively an idolator, committing full-on acts of idolatry, we still judge him favorably, assuming that anything else in his house, even if it looks and smells like idolatry, is nothing more than a decoration or a keepsake and remains permitted to benefit from. Despite his chazakah of being wicked, we still deem him to be righteous with regards to any action he has not clearly already done, and we do not assume that he will continue to sin in the future. In the merit of our limud zchuss on every Jew we meet, we should merit to be judged favorably by Hashem and be written down for blessing in the coming year, and merit the ultimate blessing, of our speedy and complete redemption!

—Rabbi Aharon Coff

[teenageascetic]

“The life and vitality which the teachings of Chasidus infuse into all aspects of the world (the “miniature world” of man, and the “real,” literal world) issue from the vitality that Chasidus infuses into all the elements of Torah, and are generated from that life-force—for all the elements of Creation are drawn from and are derived through the Torah.

In the Torah itself there are four levels of interpretation: peshat, remez, drush and sod, and the teachings of Chasidus imbue each one with life and vitality.

That is, in addition to the explanations which Chasidus gives to various subjects within all four parts of Torah (which negates the common misconception that Chasidus arose in order to explain only the “esoteric” part of Torah) the learning of Chasidus also infuses life into every subject (in all the parts of Pardes [the acronym for peshat, remez, drush, sod]) which we learn in Torah. And the subject then “lives” in an entirely different manner, with an Essential life-force. This vitality strikingly illuminates and profoundly deepens one’s understanding of the idea.

An analogy to this concept of additional illumination and vitality in the Revealed part of Torah, and in a practical law, is as follows:

“The entire service of Yom Kippur is only acceptable when done by him” (the High Priest). In the same manner that the holiness of Yom Kippur is effective for the special services of Yom Kippur, it also affects the daily and extra (Shabbat) sacrifices that are in themselves connected to all the regular days of the year; they, too, become sanctified through the sanctity of Yom Kippur.

The same is true of Chasidus, the “Shabbat Shabbaton” of Torah: it likewise affects and influences all the parts of Torah. For the four parts of Pardes are the four levels of the Nefesh, Ruach, Neshamah and Chaya of Torah, and Chasidus is the Torah’s Yechidah ; and the manifestation and revelation of the Yechidah elevates all the other four levels of NaRaNaCh, as explained above.”

-Rebbe Yosef Yitzchak Schneersohn.

[rebbestorah]

Humble As Ever

וַיָּבֹא משֶׁה וַיְדַבֵּר אֶת כָּל דִּבְרֵי הַשִּׁירָה הַזֹּאת בְּאָזְנֵי הָעָם הוּא וְהוֹשֵׁעַ בִּן נוּן (דברים לב, מד) AND MOSHE CAME AND SPOKE ALL THE WORDS OF THIS SONG IN THE EARS OF THE PEOPLE, HE, AND HOSHEA SON OF NUN. (DEVARIM 32:44) 

The Torah recounts the first time that Moshe and Yehoshua jointly addressed Bnei Yisrael: “And Moshe came and spoke all the words of this song… he, and Hoshea son of Nun.”

Drawing from the three distinct sources, Rashi comments on this episode: “It was a Shabbos of joint leadership; authority was taken from one and given to the other (Sotah 13b). Moshe appointed a spokesperson for Yehoshua (to broadcast his lectures to the public,) so that he could teach in Moshe’s lifetime, so that the Jewish people would not say, “During your teacher’s lifetime you would not raise your head!” (Sifrei 31:1) And why does Scripture here call him Hoshea (for his name had long since been changed to Yehoshua [see Bamidbar 13:16])? To teach us, that he did not become haughty. Though he was given high status, he humbled himself as he had formerly (Sifrei 32:44).”

Rashi’s three points each answer a question that the previous one gives rise to.

Unlike any other transfer of leadership in the Torah and Prophets, where the successor began to lead only after his predecessor’s passing, Moshe and Yehoshua’s joint address was, in effect, a compromise on Moshe’s exclusive leadership—“Authority was taken from one, and given to the other.” Why was this exception necessary?

During his predecessor’s lifetime, Yehoshua was the quintessential follower. He was known as Moshe’s “attendant” (Shemos 33:11), and not as a leader. As such, the people might believe he was too meek to lead and say, “During your teacher’s lifetime you would not raise your head!” in Rashi’s words. It was therefore necessary to establish Yehoshua’s leadership—to raise his head, as it were—while Moshe was still alive.

But if the objective was to dispel the notion that Yehoshua was timid, why did the Torah revert to calling him Hoshea here, a name that recalled his early years as Moshe’s attendant, before it was changed to Yehoshua?

This illustrates Yehoshua’s extraordinary humility, says Rashi. The Torah calls him Hoshea here to underscore that despite Moshe specifically elevating him and imbuing him with the preeminence necessary to lead, Yehoshua actively maintained his trademark humility—“He humbled himself, as he had formerly.”

—Likutei Sichos, vol. 29, pp. 198-201

[eisheschayil]

[qtheallpowerful]

Hey regarding your tisha b'av discussion of the fading of grief. I saw a sermon recently that stuck with me about how we should re evaluate who we are grieving for. We lost a home then, but we have found many homes since. We have our JCCs and Shuls. HaShem however never got a new home. We shouldnt grieve so much for ourselves as we should grieve in empathy for Them losing Their home amongst us. Todays the day HaShem asked the angels how a king of flesh mourns, and when told to cry, did so.

It’s true that in the years since the destruction we have found ways to maintain our connection to G-d and to each other. But that is not what the destruction took from us. The Bais Hamikdash was a place where we could go and see, literally see G-d, and have a direct physical connection to Him. We’ve never lost our connection to G-d, and G-d of course has never lost His connection to us. What we are lacking is a revelation of that connection. Yes, on Tisha B’Av G-d Himself cries with us, but He cries for us, not for Himself. He cries because we are no longer in a place that we are able to see Him.

That is the grief that is missing. I can not speak for anyone else, but I grieve for my lack of grief. That I am not able to feel strongly the lack of G-dliness and yearn for a return of that connection, that is tragic to me.

[becoming-balabusta]

Several of the early chassidim had a farbrengen sometime between 5544-47 (1784-87) and the core of the discussion was this: The Rebbe (the Alter Rebbe) had accomplished something novel - that we are not alone. At one time, the Master - Rosh Yeshiva or Talmudic sage - was "alone" and his disciples were "alone." The chassidic way instituted by the Rebbe is a tremendous Divine achievement, that the Rebbe is not alone, nor are the chassidim alone.

HaYom Yom 22 Iyar