איך ללמד חסידות

00:01 Speaker 1 This is Iggros. We are looking in volume Chaf Ches, which is what we've been working on for, I don't know, six months now. We're in the year Tav Shin Lamed Gimel, maybe longer than six months, and we are look-- exactly fifty years ago. We're looking at a letter from Ches Vav Tammuz, so almost exactly fifty years ago. The letter is Yud Tav Tav Chaf Tes, and it is enormous, and we're not gonna read it. It's an enormous letter. It is a-- one of these rare letters that are, that are Klali Prati. Uh, I will confess, without any embarrassment about it, that I knew very little about Iggros before we started this year. A couple of you en-encouraged us to start it, and I, I dove into it, so now I know quite a bit about Iggros. But I really didn't know much about how the Rebbe writes letters, uh, until a couple of months ago. I hadn't really, uh, spent a lot of time with these books. Fact is that a lot of Iggros are written as Klali Prati, that the Rebbe would write to a community and give them a whole community message, and then he would, below the line, respond in PS's to all the people from that community or that group of people who had written to him in the past couple of months. It's just a very efficient way to write letters. So he'd se-he'd send a community, like you see this a lot to, uh, to like Far Chabad or

01:01 Speaker 1 places in Eretz Yisrael. The Rebbe will send a big letter to them on some occasion, like in this case, I think it was Yud-- Rebbe-- the occasion was Yud Gimel Tammuz, and then below the line respond in line to several different letters that have come in from individuals that weren't particularly private, but was just an efficient way to respond to everybody. These letters are goldmines because what you have below the line there is the Rebbe addressing specific questions that need to be answered, uh, bit by bit, all in one place. So you have a-- th-the-these letters are unique in that they're the, th-th-they're repositories of twenty-five different ideas sometimes. And that's what we have here. So we have here in front of us a Mihtav Klali that the Rebbe writes in the summer to, um, I believe, uh, Tzemach Gedalyoh Chabad in New York, so nothing terribly special there. He tells them, we can read it in our spare time. He tells them that they need to, uh, work very hard to make sure that over the summer, people are, um, learning Torah, specifically Tzedakah V'Shabath, specifically Hinuch Atara Sakidish. But then below the line here, he starts responding to everybody individually. And I think we might spend a few Shiurim on these, but I am only gonna look at this one today. This one down here, I've highlighted it for you. It's all the way down. Mihtav Meaz, um, and, uh, w-- does anybody know what that one is? Mihtav Meaz u-

02:17 Speaker 2 Ahammed Suruf.

02:18 Speaker 1 Ah, Suruf is here. Nisgavel. I knew he'd show up. This letter has been received. Here he makes two points. One of them we're gonna skim over, and the other one we're gonna spend all of our time on. The first point up here, he says, um, "When it comes to Rashi, the beginning part of the Yishav, Bikesh, Hakadosh, Baruch Hu, Ein L'Shabbes k'Halas HaAdam v'Lo Hayenu Ein Od Aya." What is that talking about? Fortunately, we have a footnote. I made it a little bit bigger down here so you can all see it on the screen. We have a footnote. This is a part-- this part of the Mihtav Prati was written to Abalavi Levin. Anybody know him? I, I don't think I know him. Okay. Abalavi Levin, it's printed in Mikdash Melech, and what had happened is that, um, down here, footnote Bikesh, he wrote to the Rebbe that, uh, you guys know this Rashi. This Rashi is the one right before something bad happens to Yosef. So right before something bad happens to Yosef, he gets taken by his brothers. Yaakov dwells in the land, and Rashi there says, remember the Rashi? Rashi says, "See what happens when Tzadikim wanna relax. Tzadikim try to take a break. They chill for a minute, and God says, 'It's not enough that I'm gonna give you relaxation in the next world. You want relaxation in this world too?'" So he has something bad happen to them. So Yaakov tried to relax in this world. That was completely unreasonable,

03:26 Speaker 1 and because of that, Eisav just sent him a, uh, sent him a terrible challenge, sent him the whole Yosef episode just so he couldn't calm down. Now, this writer writes to the Rebbe that it's very strange that Rashi brings this version of the Midrash and cites the Midrash when this is not what the Midrash says, and as a matter of fact, no Midrash says this. He says he went through looking at all the Girsas and all the Midrashim that Rashi apparently quotes appear to be typos. It appears that a mistake snuck in somewhere because the Midrash in its original and in all extant copies of this Midrash doesn't say that Hashem makes this claim, says that Satan makes this claim, and that's a pretty big mistake, right? So the way that the Midrash actually goes is that when Tzadikim want to relax, Satan sees them and says, "Oh, it's not enough you get the next world. You wanna relax in this world?" And goes to Hashem and is Mekadsh and makes a Kitrug, makes a prosecution saying, "This Tzadik, you have to punish him because look, he's relaxing." So where does this come from? Does this come from Eisav or come from Satan? And the Nafka Mina is significant. Mainly not-- main Nafka Mina is whether it's an Avera or not, because a lot of times people do Avera-- people do things that are not Averas, and nonetheless, the Satan is Mekadsh. You have the example of, uh, Avraham Avinu. Avraham Avinu, um, he, uh,

04:29 Speaker 1 he didn't offer a, he didn't offer a bull to God at each of his meals. So the Satan comes in and says, "Oh, see how Avraham Avinu doesn't offer a bull to you? I think you should try to make him offer his son." This is a Midrash, that the Akeida happened as a Kitrug. That wasn't because he'd done anything wrong. There's a Iyov where the Satan is Mekadsh, that Iyov wouldn't be so good if he had some losses. Iyov hadn't done an Avera. Kitrug doesn't mean an Avera. So if the version that Rashi has, where HaKadosh Baruch Hu is the one who's upset, it sounds like Yaakov did something wrong. That's the version we have, is Yaakov tried to relax, and Hashem said, "That's an Avera. A small Avera, you're a Tzadik, but that's an Avera. You're not allowed to relax. Let me give you some challenges." If Satan's the Mekadsh, maybe he did nothing wrong. So this writer writes this to the Rebbe and says, "Maybe we should be fixing the Svarim. It looks like it really is just a mistake, not a Diyaq Rashi." And, uh, he says, "Ashai Lehi, Ha'im Zeh Emes Shiya Gasa She-She Ein Af-Echa Metaken Esav." This is really such a glaring error. How is it possible no one ever fixed it? So the Rebbe writes back to him saying, "Ein L'Shabbes k'Halas HaAdam. Let's not fix all books in the entire world. V'Lo Hayenu Ein Od Aya." Just that you-- the fact that we haven't found a version

05:31 Speaker 1 of this like Rashi doesn't mean it doesn't exist somewhere in the canon. We're keeping it the way it is, and the Rebbe leaves it there. I do wanna let you know that, uh, eleven years later, the Rebbe gave a Sicha that is entirely on this question with answers on this question, making a Diyaq between the Rashi and the, uh, a Diyaq between the Rashi and the version of the Midrash. And it is exactly the Diyaq that I just said to you. That is that the Rebbe's Midiaq, that the version of the Midrash wants to tell us is that Yaakov didn't do anything wrong, and the version that Rashi wants to bring is that Yaakov did do something wrong, that there was an actual mistake involved here in relaxing, and the Rebbe's Midiaq and goes through. It's a long Sicha. It's actually printed in Hebrew. It's in volume thirty, page one seventy-seven of Likutey Sichos. Ayin Shin. We're not gonna talk about it at length today, but I do wanna point out that this question somebody asked the Rebbe eleven years earlier, the Rebbe ends up turning into a Sicha eleven years later. Um, we're gonna go on to the next part now. The next part of the Rebbe's answer to this individual, he goes, "B'Nagea L'Likutey Sichos." When it comes to Likutey Sichos, "Tach Liyesh Be'Epen U'V'lashon U'Biyr HaMovin Yesod Hashem," and it needs to be in a way that is That is a, uh, that is in a lashon and a language and a

06:31 Speaker 1 beer and an explanation that is understand-- that is understandable, most understandable. That is most understandable to those listening. There is no room in the world for the diyukim that you are writing to me. And then he says, "I'm gonna write your pan. I'm gonna read your pan by the Tzion." So what's that all about? Looking below the line again. Um, he had written to the Rebbe that there's somebody who, uh, who in Kfar Chabad is teaching, or I guess he's teaching. He is teaching sichas in Kfar Chabad. There's may-maybe, maybe it should be . Uh, a argument that I think Chassidim have all the time, right? An, an old argument is that whether, whether sichas and ma'amarim and things that are said in Chassidus should be said over in the original, whether the Rebbe's words, the Rebbe's golden words, should be given to everybody, or whether they should be explained. So this person wrote to the Rebbe saying, "I think maybe the sichas I'm chazering in Kfar Chabad should be, should be said exactly the way you said it. Maybe I shouldn't be adding a beer from other sichas. Maybe I shouldn't be adding a beer from other mekiras." And the Rebbe's responding to that statement by saying, "Absolutely not." Says, "No, I would like you to explain it in your own way. I want this to be understood very well. I want this to be in a language and with an explanation that people who are listening understand it, understand it best. There's no

07:47 Speaker 1 room in the world for ." I don't know if he means that there is no room for the diyukim that you wanna make or the diyuk that you wanna make that should be , but I believe it's the latter because that would reflect every other letter from the Rebbe on this subject. So, um, to take a bit of a, a step back, this is an old argument between the Chassidim. It goes back to Chassidim of the Alter Rebbe. It goes back to Chassidim of the Mitler Rebbe. This is an old debate, uh, whether it is best to review Chassidus in the original language or whether it is best to say it in a way that everybody understands. There are, as you can imagine, pluses and minuses to both. I think we're all aware of the pluses and minuses to both. On, on one hand, if you, uh, if you sit down at our, at our table on, uh, on, uh, what is it? Uh, we have a ma'amar every week. Um, there is a-- there are some people who chazer that ma'amar. It's happened before. It's not so common anymore, but it's happened before, and it used to happen a lot, that they would be chazer in Yiddish, and it would be chazer very quickly in Yiddish, in sort of the s- with the tsiyur of the Rebbe. You know, look downward looking, um, chazering exactly those words. And there's something special about that. If you've never seen it done before, you've missed something. It

08:47 Speaker 1 definitely speaks to the neshamah. That is, that is a fact. The Mitler Rebbe guaranteed this, that people who don't understand Chassidus, when you say Chassidus , even if their ears don't understand and their minds don't get it, it speaks right to their neshamah. There's a real milah to doing things that way. It's, it's authentic, and it's beautiful. At the same time, no one understands what you're saying. On the other extreme, we have people, I count myself among them , who when they chazer a ma'amar explain it so much in depth that a lot of times the Lashon HaRav is lost in translation. Now, hopefully, we don't lose the message itself. Hopefully, we explain it well. But there is another extreme where the Chassidus is explained and everybody understands, but it doesn't feel like it comes from the Rebbe anymore, and it doesn't feel like a ma'amar. It feels like somebody's giving a dvar Torah that they, you know, uh, shoehorned the Rebbe's words into chassishon. And, uh, I ho- I hope, I hope that-- I think most of us when we chazer ma'amarim, I'm very proud of the way that we do them. I, I think that we fall right in the middle. However, these two extremes do exist, and mashpiyim throughout the ages have discussed back and forth which one's better. I think the Rebbe takes a side. I think the Rebbe takes a very strong side on this, and I'm going to bring you, what is it? One, two, three, four, five, six,

09:47 Speaker 1 seven, eight letters and a couple, uh, a couple, uh, a line from the Kuntress Sichos, something printed in looks like it's a . I'm gonna bring you like eleven proofs that the Rebbe does not want us chazering Chassidus . He wants it specifically in a way that is best understood by the general public, that the Rebbe is not happy when we chazer Chassidus in a language that most people don't understand or in a surah that most people don't understand, and would like us to do whatever possible to make sure it is understood, while of course maintaining some Lashon HaRav and maintaining crucially the order of the Rav, the say of the Rav. The Rebbe's gonna say this in a few letters, that he wants the order of things maintained. Don't rearrange his ma'amarim, don't rearrange his sichas, but certainly say the ma'amarim and sichas in ways that people understand. Let's look at a few of these letters. Oh, this is the first one. We already saw this letter. This one over here. Sorry. This is a letter in volume three, the letter is Tav Pei Beis, and the Rebbe writes, When it comes to the question of chazering Chassidus, whether it should be understood by people in general, the Rebbe says, "The whole reason why I selected certain ma'amarim and why certain ma'amarim were written in Yiddish," "why we included them in a book of Yiddish was specifically to help to give you ma'amarim that are good for presenting to the general public." That is,

11:05 Speaker 1 the ma'amarim that were printed in Yiddish were printed in Yiddish 'cause a lot of people back then spoke Yiddish a lot better than they spoke Hebrew. I don't know if that's necessarily the case right now. But a lot of people understood Yiddish better, so the ma'amarim were specifically printed in Yiddish in a volume of ma'amarim in Yiddish because the Rebbe was looking to give you easier ma'amarim that could be understood more easily by the general public. I'm sorry, that's a different part of the letter. We're not gonna read that right now. So he says that you should-- I think what we draw from this letter is that you should be reviewing Chassidus in the language that people understand. If they speak English, in English. If they speak Hebrew, in Hebrew. If they speak Yiddish, in Yiddish. This is part of a very long letter. It letter is, uh, volume four, the letter number is Tav Tav Tzadik Tes. We're just gonna look at this paragraph here that I've highlighted. He said, "I really like the idea that you had to send some of the timim to, uh, to teach Chassidus in a Beis Midrash," "to review, uh, to review a part of a ma'amar," "but it should be done in a way, the right way to do it is in a way that people understand," not only that, Furthermore, I want you to tell a story before you start. That is, don't just chazer the Chassidus, pepper it with stories. Take a story from the

12:15 Speaker 1 Sichas. Don't make up a ridiculous story. Um, and yeah. So he says that there's an incredible tale as to the people listening to it, an incredible star, and it will light up their eyes, and there's an additional that it's also going to, uh, to, uh, bring them to you, the Shem, you have a spot on them, and, uh, i-including those that lays out the enemy, even those who are not yet members of Anash, they could become members of Anash. Incredible, uh, Taylor is in making sure that the Maimaram are understood and in putting stories beforehand. So once again, we're talking about and in a way that the Shem understand. This letter is, uh, from volume eighteen, from the year. The Rebbe writes in the middle of the letter, in response to his question. Am I allowed to say over in a casual way, in a way that's a conversation? Am I able to take the and turn it into a kind of bring it out rather than reviewing it the way that it was originally said or written? This isn't just allowed at like a. This is obligatory. This is a shocking question that you're even asking. I'm surprised you'd even ask me. explained of the Rashab. This is the Rebbe Rashab already explained. So if people believe in Tanya, even when it comes to learning Tanya, be maybe that even that if you can bring to it would be a good idea to his printing coach says even when it comes to Tanya, which

13:40 Speaker 1 is generally considered, if people will understand it better by talking it out, it should be spoken out and taught in a way that is not word for it. This is well known and publicized among Anash. I don't think so. I hate to disagree with any part of the Rebbe's letter. He says this is well known and well publicized among Anash. I don't think so. At least not nowadays. If you ask a lot of Mashpiim, I think they'll go fifty-fifty on this question. If this was the case back then in the time of the Rebbe Rashab this certainly should apply in our time. Um, okay. I think I wanna read this one down here too. And when you ask furthermore, okay, so fine, I'm allowed to explain the Maimaram in my own words, but am I allowed to interrupt the Maimaram and then put in my own explanations am I allowed to put in the middle of the Maimaram explain other things from other places if the people there don't understand you, then that is also the right thing to do. So if it is necessary for the understanding of those listening, if they don't have a lot of background in and they need you to, I don't know, a word comes up in a Maimaram that's complicated and you need to pause and bring from somewhere else in what exactly that word means and how it shapes to the Maimaram, go right ahead and do it. The Rebbe has a very liberal policy when it

14:56 Speaker 1 comes to interrupting Maimaram in the middle for purpose of explanation 'cause he cares most about people understanding the that is being said. This letter is-- this is not a letter, this is a Sikha. This is a Sikha that is in. You'll find it in volume four. It is in page and the Rebbe writes in this we should remind and inspire the students that are going to go in the that they should not pick hard Maimaram. I hear some of them are showing up, some of them are going out there to the shuls and explaining, you know, deep these need to be simple Maimaram. things that are easy to explain in, in normal mortal they need to be also explained in a way that is understood in the So Rebbe says that these need to be it needs to be in a way that people understand, and part of that is picking material that is not incredibly difficult. One more letter I wanna show you here. This is part of a very long letter. This letter is in volume six. The letter is and the part we're looking at is entry Zion. The Rebbe has like a hundred points he makes in this letter. This is point seven. When people are, are reviewing Maimaram by heart when these things are reviewed in public, they need to be things that are understood, uh, simply. They're simple to understand, also or things at the very least that who aren't so familiar with will understand says here that this

16:40 Speaker 1 is the opposite of what a lot of people think, so pay attention. This is when you're picking Maimaram to learn to learn well enough to in public, don't necessarily pick ones that are to the Shabbos that you were assigned or the Shabbos you're speaking on because 'cause it'll happen sometimes. If you learn a Maimaram really well, you always have that Maimaram in your back pocket. You can always when there's a need for a Maimaram. So rather than finding a Maimaram that is only going to really be appropriate for a specific Shabbos or a specific Yom Tov, it'd be a good idea to pick more general Maimaram, and that way you learn it well once and anytime you're traveling or you're somewhere else and someone says, "Anybody have a Maimaram?" You can pull one out of your back pocket that will be always applicable. So I know some people ask me when it comes to when it comes to the, uh, Maimaram that we every week, should they pick one or do they have to pick one that goes with the Parsha, goes with the Yom Tov. I always tell them absolutely not. It's if anything better to have one in your back pocket that you know really well that is not to any specific time. I do wanna show you two things that I wasn't able to find links for, but I was able to find in other books, uh, down here. This is in the. It's in volume eighteen, it's page four forty. The

17:46 Speaker 1 Rebbe says When the Rebbe was asked about whether people should be memorizing Gemara or memorizing Maimaram, the Rebbe said, "Yeah, if some people have photographic memories and they're very good at memorizing every word, they may as well learn every word." But for everybody else, he wants to make sure that the understood that is that Maimaram and Gemara should be understood and memorized if w- whenever possible in a way of question, answer back and forth, one line next to the other, so they should be done in order. Uh, but that does not mean that they should be done just that they should be done in the order that they were originally spoken. This is printed in. I don't believe that this is printed anywhere else right now, probably in some of the collection books. This is somebody who went to during the and the Rebbe told him the following. So Rebbe says, "Look around the table before you before you teach people. First of all, ask yourself, 'Will most people understand what I'm saying?' And second of all, ask yourself, 'Will most people sit through it?' They shouldn't be terribly long, and they also should not be terribly difficult." So I think what we have from here, I, um, I gave you this supplemental. If I haven't given you this, I'll give it to you so you can look at these letters yourselves Uh, I think we have here the Rebbe's very definitive position on what we're supposed to do with Chassidus, and that is davka

19:06 Speaker 1 not repeating it directly in the original language or in the original way that it was delivered, keeping the order and keeping the spirit, and certainly requires a little bit of yiras Shomayim, so you don't chas v'Shalom adulterate it or turn it into something that it's not. But with a little yiras Shomayim and a little bit of to the Rebbe, it should be straightforward to take Chassidus, understand it, and then relay it to the public, ideally, things that are easy for them to understand, explained in a way that helps them understand the material with hopefully the goal of, as we say in this letter over here, I believe, bringing them closer to Chassidus Chabad, increasing the yiras Shomayim, and taking those who are not yet members of Anash and making them members of Anash. That's it.

19:46 Speaker 2 So first of all, I wanna say that, um, I think this is a fantastic, fantastic, uh, topic for Igris because this is something that I've always struggled with, befrat, that as a Bachur Yeshiva and the way we were taught from day one was to chazar oisios chadash. Whether you understood it or not, chazar oisios chadash. That's how we did it when the Bachur was did in Yeshiva. And it's interesting because if, if you look at-- and maybe I'm wrong, maybe I don't know how it is exactly. If you look at most bar mitz-- bar mitzvah Bachurim are taught to chazar a maimar in Yiddish, And so many of the kids don't even understand Yiddish, have no idea what they're talking about. So with some parents, I see what they've done is they, they take and they, they, you know, teach the child the maimar in English, so that the child at least understands what they're saying. So say, "Okay, I'm gonna teach you the, the topic of the maimar, but you're still gonna say it in the, in the And again, I could be wrong. Um, but that still doesn't-- that still takes away from the fact that the chazar of the maimar, and maybe bar mitzvah Bachur it's different, right? Maybe for bar mitzvah Bachur, it's a passage, a rite of passage that he has to chazar maimar because now he's becoming an adult, and he has to learn how to chazar maimars. So maybe that's what it is. But if the pe-- if

20:53 Speaker 2 the purpose of chazaring a maimar at a bar mitzvah, maybe that's something you could delve into a little further. If the purpose of chazaring the maimar at the bar mitzvah is in order to teach Chassidus at the bar mitzvah to the people that are there of a maimar related bar mitzvah, then it literally defeats the purpose when you're saying Unless-- So it really depends what the purpose of that maimar is. So that's what I was-- the, the note that I made to myself is bar mitzvah maimar, because that seems to be the, the first-- this initiation to chazar Chassidus for young children, yet it's done in that particular way, which I would, I would, I would venture to say that a majority of the kids don't understand Yiddish and have no clue what they're saying in the Yiddish and Hebrew language.

21:37 Speaker 1 I think just seychel tells us if they don't understand it, that it's probably mostly, m-m-mostly not worthwhile. I'm not sure that there's any value to learning Torah you don't understand ever, unless it's Torah shebe-

21:46 Speaker 2 No, but the q-- but the question is, is it-- is, is the purpose of the maimar bar mitzvah maimar-

21:49 Speaker 3 There's also practicing. There's also practicing to do it.

21:52 Speaker 1 Right. I mean, un-unless you're learning Torah shebe KSav, there probably isn't any, any... Or which can be-- could be Tanakh. Tanakh and Torah shebe KSav, you don't see any inyan of, of, of learning something you don't understand at all. But in answer to the other question you asked, which is, are these things sha'atz to the bar mitzvah maimar, I need to look it up again, but I believe some of these letters I'm quoting to you were specifically sha'atz to the bar mitzvah maimar. I think some of these were, were specifically written to bar mitzvah Bachurim, telling them that the, the idea is that it should be understood by the general public. So-

22:19 Speaker 2 Right. So that, that would be very interesting because that means it's not about a rite of passage. I always thought that the bar mitzvah maimars, like, you know, by the whole velt, they, they learn the Parsha, and they learn how to learn from the Torah. In Chassid-- In, in the Chassidish environment, in Lubavitch, you learn how to chazar a maimar, and it's a rite of passage.

22:33 Speaker 1 Well, I think that's true. I just think that, uh, based on what the Rebbe is telling us here, you're not learning how to chazar a maimar if you're learning how to parrot words in Yiddish to an audience that doesn't understand you. Learning how to chazar a maimar should be learning how to learn a maimar and then relay it to the public effectively while retaining the tzurah of the Rav, if not lashon. And, um, if that's not being done, I think it should be.

22:54 Speaker 3 Growing up, we always-- all my friends, me included, we had a tutor, we learned the maimar, and, um, then we said it over, meaning learning it alpeh in Yiddish. I mean, I had a little bit of an advantage of growing up speaking Yiddish at home, but, um, I did the same for my son.

23:16 Speaker 2 Right. But, but Mendy, you're-- Mendy, Mendy Friedman, you wanna say something? I see you unmuted.

23:20 Speaker 4 I was, I was just gonna say, no, it sounds like the whole point is also know your audience.

23:25 Speaker 2 Right, exactly.

23:26 Speaker 4 So if you're expecting to be in this, this, this audience where everyone understands Yiddish and everyone's expecting everyone comes from, let's say, from Ansh, it's one thing. But if you're talking about someone who's coming from, like, a Chabad house setting, maybe it's better if the Bachur does it in, in English or whatever.

23:38 Speaker 3 Hundred percent. That's what I was... You know, like, that's what I'm say-- I was thinking that it's not so much the style-

23:45 Speaker 2 Mendel, Mendel, the question is, is, is the purpose of bar mitzvah maimar to chazar Chassidus or to teach Chassidus? I think that could be a distinction. If the chazar-

23:53 Speaker 3 Exactly. It could be-

23:54 Speaker 2 If chazar maimar in our shul, chazaring a maimar in our shul, the way I look at it at least, and it's changed over the years, 'cause years before, when I used to chazar maimar in shul, I used to chazar oisios chadash. But then over the last, like, year or so, two maybe, Yechiel, you had an influence in that, where people come in and chazar a maimar and, like, try to actually explain a topic in Chassidus to people sitting around the table-

24:12 Speaker 3 Okay

24:12 Speaker 2 ... change the entire, the, the entire direction where that's really what the maimar now is.

24:17 Speaker 3 So what I'm trying-

24:17 Speaker 2 And that, I look at that as not so much about chazaring a maimar, it's more about teaching a maimar.

24:22 Speaker 3 So what I'm saying is that, well, that's the word, chazaring a maimar. Meaning, even when you're chazaring a maimar, doesn't mean that it shouldn't be understood. Meaning, you could still say it in a similar tone to what-- the way the Rebbe said it, in the same manner as what the Rebbe said it, instead of se-seem like giving a shiur, if you understand what I'm trying to say.

24:42 Speaker 2 Well, that goes to the first comment you made in the-

24:45 Speaker 3 You could still say it and explain it.

24:45 Speaker 2 In the, in the Zoom, the first comment you made was, is there a difference between saying a maimar and giving a shi-- and, and a shiur.

24:49 Speaker 3 Yes. Exactly.

24:54 Speaker 1 There definitely is a difference. Uh, Reb Shlomo Cheym, when he was giving instructions on how to chazar a maimar and he was not a fan of oisios chadash, and other Mashpiyim disagreed with him on the topic, but he was never a fan of oisios chadash maimar, and he felt they should only be done in oisios chadash if it's Tanakh, but other than that, it should be teyfen. But he did say the teyfen should be in a, in a tzurah of shailah, tzurah, shailah, tzurah. Um, so that I think what a shiur does, when somebody gives a shiur on a maimar, they're totally authorized to, to take the middle of the maimar, put it in the front, cut parts of it out. They're teaching an inyan of Chassidus, and they're using a maimar as kind of their source text. Chazaring a maimar, I think, based on what Reb Shlomo Cheym taught and what's recorded from his students, chazaring a maimar should be the entire maimar. It should be done in order. Um, it should keep the structure the way the Rebbe said it, but, uh, but not the words the way the Rebbe said them. And if in the middle, as the Rebbe showed us in these letters, if in the middle explanation's required, pause, tell them, uh, tell them what this means. Bring up-- Bring another source in if necessary for the listeners.