A Chassidishe Bochur

00:01 Well, the Rebbe came to the farbrengen on the first day. [unclear]. What is a chassidisher bochur? What is the difference between a chassidisher bochur and bochurim in other yeshivos? The Rebbe asked a few questions. Someone said: A chassidisher bochur wears a beard. A chassidisher bochur has peyos, is careful about going to the mikveh and about davening, and [unclear]. On this, the Rebbe said that no Jew should think Chabad means only inwardness. And, you know, the main thing is inwardness. There is encouragement and [unclear] in this: beyond those things, a chassidisher Jew has inner feeling, an inner outlook. Yiddishkeit, too, is something deeper, something inward, not something external. As for outward appearances, they are not the main thing; they flow from what is within. As the Rebbe said then, when [unclear] Chanukah gelt, it was [unclear] year, it was the practice that year. The Rebbe told all the [unclear] that giving Chanukah gelt is, after all, an external matter. The main thing is that one must be a chossid. If there is no inner substance, what is the outward appearance worth? So the Rebbe did indeed say that. We see that the main thing is what is within—by all accounts, that is the main thing. [unclear] once comes and says: What is the essence of a chassidisher bochur?

02:01 A beard. Yes, there was [unclear]; the beard was a challenge. Today, Boruch Hashem, that challenge does not exist. In America, in the early years, I’m telling you, it was hard. A beard, peyos, and davening—that was not part of an ordinary American bochur’s way of life. And yet these are outward things. They show that he is a chassidisher bochur. But it is interesting that the Rebbe spoke about outward things. By all accounts, being a chassidisher bochur is an inner matter. Again, we have to say: we understand that being a chassidisher bochur is an inner matter, a goal. It is something within his soul; he thinks about spiritual matters. What is happening inside? Does it find expression in actual practice—in how he goes about, in a way that can be felt in his avodah? That is a chassidisher bochur. What now? What matters? What doesn’t matter all the time? They wear their hair long. Is that [unclear] something befitting a chossid or something that is not? What does matter? He is, as the Rebbe says, a Jew with an inner heart. He is a Jew, as the Rebbe says, like a tzaddik. That is what they say in [unclear]. He is a Jew with heart. He is an inward person. He is chassidish. But that does not mean, chas veshalom, that this is... The Rebbe did not mean that. The Rebbe was a Rebbe. The Rebbe was [unclear]. The Rebbe, [unclear]. The Rebbe did not say that. But the beard is important too. It is just that the main thing was not

03:28 the beard. The Rebbe says that in other circles they used to shave their beards, right? There were the Hungarians. There was [unclear]; I don’t know when that was here. But for someone who is among the chassidim, the point is not the beard itself. Rather, the root of the beard is [unclear]. The beard is the result of something deeply [unclear], something deeply inward. That inner thing is reflected outwardly in the beard, and one cannot know how deep it goes. And the Hungarians [unclear] about the beard. Nu, what does the Rebbe mean? We understand this: if someone had a beard and peyos, and perhaps also [unclear], but he was a chossid under the blanket, not under the tallis. Whereas for one of the chassidim, it is under the tallis. You wrap yourself in a tallis and think Chassidus. A chossid, unfortunately, has to be a chossid under the blanket. A chossid is one on the inside, right? But it is interesting how the Rebbe stresses that it has to come out. It is not enough that he thinks like a chossid, or has a certain outlook, or [unclear], or [unclear], [unclear] chassidish. That, too, is something. But in actual practice, we see that this is a great, great test. A person [unclear] thinks: Does this not matter? Does the whole thing, the whole thing, not matter? The main thing is inside; the main thing is [unclear]. Chassidus also speaks about [unclear] middos. The [unclear]—inside, I am a chossid.

04:59 Me, as for what is on the outside—true, [unclear]—I am a chossid. [unclear] is inside. Leave it, [unclear], nu. The bochurim who really [unclear] outward appearances. After all, a chossid is a person. After all, a chossid is an outward appearance. [unclear], that is a thought. But that is not how it is. It isn’t.

00:00 And [unclear]. The group that actually [unclear] the externality. Externality—that isn’t it, that isn’t the externality. Three times, it’s... but that’s not it. It isn’t. And the person who [unclear] even the externality. [unclear] last week, in [unclear], the Rebbe explains that these are two kinds of kelipos: one is internal, and the other is an encompassing garment. After all, we’re talking about [unclear], and here it isn’t something you can say [unclear] about. Here, all kinds of desires can come into play. There’s a difference: this isn’t an inner desire; it’s [unclear] for honor, for garments, for encompassing things—a desire for garments. A person is immersed in a desire for garments; at this point he can already, on his own, [unclear]. It’s a deeper desire, and it’s only [unclear]. And we understand that garments are something encompassing. It has more to do with spirituality, with one’s outlook, with this matter of being clothed, so that people won’t be able to [unclear]. And [unclear] like a beggar. And someone who sometimes spends an hour thinking, sometimes [unclear], and then he says, “[unclear] in France, in Thailand, in England” [unclear]. He has already [unclear] from desires, and they go [unclear] a garment for him, and one [unclear] of—

01:27 A garment, and [unclear] a garment. People used to wear it to weddings for years, and [unclear] bar mitzvah [unclear] a garment, and they used to wear that same one to a wedding. In any case, over time it tore, [unclear]. When you sit at home, [unclear], and there’s [unclear] who comes into the house, and you sit by an electric lamp and turn on the light, [unclear] until it tears. Yes, but that’s a little [unclear] from what we learn [unclear]. Sometimes it happens a little, [unclear] it isn’t such a big thing, when people say that [unclear]. They sit at home with it for hours, and sit with it [unclear], a beautiful home, and [unclear]. And that has already gone a little, a little, they say, to the other side. But there are places where it isn’t just [unclear] externality, like [unclear] externality, [unclear] on the pages; that’s what [unclear] on the pages, in the externality. Well, that can be one of the cases, sometimes, certainly. [unclear] But with everything that pertains to [unclear], they say, with every thing, every desire, there’s a benefit, there’s a rationale—it’s a desire. And there has to be someone [unclear]; that’s what everyone says [unclear]. Here a person can—

02:57 Buy something [unclear]. [unclear]. That’s [unclear]. That’s [unclear].

00:01 Reb Sholom told how he came to Lubavitch. He was one of the best bochurim. Later, when he had become even more of a chossid, he came to Lubavitch. He arrived already a chossid. Afterward they appointed him mashgiach in [unclear]. But when he arrived, already a chossid, you could see how orderly and firm his conduct was. Such a firm person, and a chossid too—and yet baalebatish. You understand, I understand the joy of [unclear], but in practice that is how it looked: he was baalebatish. But from this story we understand: when someone was a [unclear] bochur, it was not because he was more orderly. [unclear], yet he carries himself as though, who knows what. But that was not how it was. That was not how it was among the Temimim. He already has to give up his own sense of self, and yet he goes on conducting himself as usual. Boruch Hashem, they eat during the week, and go on eating, and continue [unclear], the mannerisms; while giving up their own sense of self, they continue with [unclear]. That is where you see a baalebos. Nu, who can be Reb Sholom? Yes, a Chassidic bochur. And the one who is more orderly—not necessarily. That is wholeness in a bochur. I suppose, I suppose [unclear]. There are genuine matters hidden here: a Chassidic bochur, and he can [unclear].

01:23 But of course, he is not in a state of bittul. The [unclear] can be separated, but inwardly that is not the reason. Inwardly, it is still that way, with [unclear]; it really does matter to that person. And another point is [unclear]. But by [unclear] they mean that it still does not matter to him. You can see a little of this in the parable, the Russian parable, [unclear], the difference between the Rebbe and the wheels. The wheels are his [unclear]. The Rebbe is the separate [unclear]. [unclear], the wheels—there was once that story [unclear]. Do you know [unclear]? The Rebbe is always the [unclear], but that is called [unclear]; the wheels are [unclear]. The Rebbe—a cold moment. Seemingly, what I still do not see is [unclear], because the Rebbe is a level of [unclear]. It is not so, because for them it is not so. Perhaps they spoke about it in the Russian parable, but it relates to these matters; it is the same point. The parable goes like this: Once, in a town, [unclear], there was an exceedingly wealthy man. The town’s rich man [unclear]. Nu, the poor man went around all week [unclear]. But on Shabbos, at the meal, this is how it has to be. All week, the poor man is already waiting for the moment when

02:45 he will sit down to the Shabbos meal. Friday night arrives, and he wants to eat. Meanwhile, the rich man has some tea, and then more tea, at his leisure, in a baalebatish way. [unclear]. So he sits there without eating, unlike the beggar, the poor man, who has spent the whole week thinking about what he will eat and what he will do. [unclear]. Now, of course, this is his moment, and he looks: which of them is perhaps more driven by appetite—the rich man or the poor man? [unclear]. The poor man says, “The rich man is more driven by appetite.” [unclear]. The poor man, the poor man—the rich man sits there with the food, and he does not see it himself. He says, “I have three [unclear].” Because for the poor man it is a different matter. There is a full table, there is a kitchen, but he [unclear]. So, as in the parable, [unclear]. But once a question arose about the [unclear]: “If so, is it forbidden to eat [unclear]?” The rich man—what is that? After all, it is not for the sake of Shabbos, Shabbos, Shabbos. But can I now [unclear]?

04:03 Even [unclear]. Nu, I mean, he waits all week, doesn’t he? [unclear]. The point is that you can take something away from a person, and when you do, you take away his very sense of self; it becomes harder and harder. But a person and his things—these are matters of substance. [unclear] the life of a Jew. By contrast, if his inner self stands on its own, his inner self stands on its own, and that is [unclear]; on the contrary, the world is one thing. These are matters of substance. When people ask about a bochur: Is he preoccupied with clothing? No, he is not preoccupied with it; it does not excite him. So what does excite him? What can be taken from that? [unclear]. Perhaps he is not preoccupied with clothing. [unclear] an outward change, [unclear]. But [unclear] to go dressed in the same clothes, and for Shabbos to be like the middle of the week. Nu, there is, there is, perhaps... perhaps his whole being will be...

05:28 his entire sense of self—but what is the point? Even then, there was a change in him. A good thing, a good thing, but [unclear]. And if not, I mean, it is a good thing, a good thing; there is a virtue in it. [unclear] there is a virtue in it, but [unclear], there is a virtue in it. [unclear]. So when they say he has to dress according to the latest fashions—look, you have to understand: what, why, what is that? [unclear] that he has to dress that way. No, perhaps he sees things differently? Where does he stand? Where does he stand with [unclear]? He has to dress that way, with [unclear], and wear new glasses, with the latest styles of glasses, [unclear] new ones, a new kind of aprons. No, I mean, do you have to follow fashion? What is the point? Really, it is a serious question, a very good question. But [unclear]. I am asking a question: Why speak this way about simple things? [unclear] bochur, I wear a beard and peyos, and everything is as is customary, and [unclear]. No, I wear this and say: A bochur, I wear this and say...

06:42 a bochur. [unclear] bochur, he looks at himself, he sees himself, he sees himself. But they ask the Rebbe: What does “bochur” mean? Would the Rebbe not know what “bochur” means? How? I mean, [unclear] what is a bochur? [unclear] the Rebbe. I mean, [unclear], no, it is not a decree. I mean, the Rebbe does [unclear] with him. And what did the Rebbe say? [unclear] The Rebbe said: to wear a beard, to wear peyos, and to go [unclear] before the Rebbe. Nu, yes, the Rebbe [unclear]. Yes, it works, it does not work, I mean, but it works, it [unclear]. It is not—what is wrong here? Nu, l’chaim, l’chaim. I hope you might understand what I am saying. I mean, l’chaim, l’chaim.