האם שיעור אגרות קודש שלנו בסדר?

00:00 Speaker 1 Okay, this is Igris. We are back to looking at letters from exactly fifty years ago, give or take. This letter is from Chof Beis Kislev, which is like Beis Kislev, except there's a Chof on top of it. Uh, it's from exactly fifty years ago, plus twenty days, Chof Beis Kislev, Tamuz Lamed Heh. And the Rebbe writes to Rabbi Shimon Yaakovovich, actually, although the footnote here doesn't say that that's who it was. In any event, this is from, uh, this is from our year. The Rebbe writes, . Says, "I received your letter. You asked for-- you sent over a pan. You wanted a in honor of Tes Kislev." And then all of the honorifics after the three Rebbe's names, close to . Says that, "I'm gonna read it by the Tzion." Okay, now, of course, comes the meat of the letter. He said, "This should be simple." "I'm not responsible," says the Rebbe, "for what people say in my name. I want you to know I'm not responsible for what people quote me as saying." "It should be very well known at this point." "And even though, even if I really did say it," which I think is the hanging implication here is, "whatever you're asking about, I'm not responsible for what other people say I said. And even if I did really say it," "what I answer to one person does not necessarily have a lesson for another person." "Therefore, I don't even understand your question." We do not know what the question was. None

01:22 Speaker 1 of the books that I looked in were able to tell me what the question was. But the point is that the Rebbe is saying two things here. Thing number one, when we say things in the Rebbe's name and we hear things in the Rebbe's name, the Rebbe is not responsible for things said in his name. He's responsible for things that we know he said. And there's a big difference there, obviously. A lot of, a lot of quotes are attributed to the Rebbe. There are websites out there that attribute some very pithy quotes to the Rebbe that by all means he never said, or he said a, he said a version of them, but certainly not the, uh, certainly not the fortune cookie version that people put out there. Um, so the Rebbe is not responsible at all for us making up the things he says. But more important for us and what we're gonna look at today is that the Rebbe says it is in the fourth Psalm. It is very well known at this point that when I answer somebody, that is not an answer for everybody. That's an answer for an individual. This is something that we talk about a lot in our Igris here because, uh, we look at letters, and we try to find trends through the letters, and we can say this is the way the Rebbe consistently responds, but we're always very cautious about even doing that, even when we have a lot of letters saying the same thing

02:12 Speaker 1 because there is this standing rule. We've referenced this standing rule several times that when you see a letter, you can't be completely sure that that's how the Rebbe would answer every person 'cause the Rebbe is answering the individual, not, uh, putting out general rules. But we haven't had a source for it yet. So what we're gonna look at today is multiple letters from the Rebbe. I think I found six or seven of them where the Rebbe makes this exact point where he says, "I want you to know that when you see a letter from me or you see or you hear a statement in my name, it was to that person and not to anybody else, and you shouldn't think that every, every time that I respond to somebody, I'm making up general rules for the entire world. I respond to the individual." And, uh, the first letter that I wanna look at actually isn't printed in Igris yet in any case. It's in, uh, Menachem M. Nachshon. It's in that Sefer and a couple other sefarim. This is written to Rabbi Levi, Levi Bystritsky. And here the Rebbe doesn't describe how he does letters, he describes how a Rav should write letters. And in this, I think we get an idea of why the Rebbe has this policy. This is actually a really interesting letter all by itself. It's about home birth, uh, whether the, uh, the Israeli rabbinate was trying to figure out whether to outlaw or support home birth as a psak.

03:06 Speaker 1 We're not going to do that today, but that'd be a really fun topic for some other time, home birth. I know it's particularly popular in our community. So you can see what the Rebbe says about it, what the Rabbanim said about it. In any event, in this letter, if you look at point Zion, the Rebbe says he's trying to give him guidelines on how to run a Chabad Beis Din. He tells him a bunch of things. He says that, uh, that, um, in Hes, he says that, uh, we shouldn't, um, we shouldn't mix in Piske Halacham from, uh, from other Rabbanim if they don't agree with each other and he says over here that you should be avoiding Machlikis to some degree. The, the Rebbe talks to him about general advice on how to run a Beis Din, but in Zion, he has a point for us. It's Pasht that when a Halacha, when a ruling, a Halachik ruling is given out to an individual, especially when it's given out in an individual letter to that individual, there's a standing rule for Rabbanim. It is not to be taken as a . It's not to be taken as a general teaching, a general psak for everybody at all. Now, look what the Rebbe is saying here. If a specific person is answered in a specific letter, that's not a . This is a Klal here. The Klal that we have-- I said in letters we're, we're talking about how the Rebbe doesn't do Klal in

04:09 Speaker 1 a letter because it's a letter Prati, so it's kinda funny. But in any event, what the Rebbe is saying here is that there is a Klal, that if you read something in a private letter that a Rebbe writes or that a Rav writes, it is not for everybody, it's for that individual. Why? Because in most cases, because usually the ruling, if it's done properly, depends on the situations and the life of the individual who the person's writing to. As they say in rabbinics, you answer the, uh, what do they say? You answer the person, not the question. That's the, uh, that's the expression that's thrown around, but it's also literal. In most cases, when the Rebbe writes a letter, in most cases, when a Rav issues a psak, he's not really giving a psak that is universal. He's giving a psak that is tailored to that individual in those circumstances, and if you don't know all the details, you can't apply it properly. By the way, this is the opinion in many Rishonim about why people who learn, uh, who learn Torah but don't get Shmash are considered Mechabli Olam. There's a Gemara in Masechet Sota that we just learned in our Ein Yaakov share that people who, uh, know Halacha but don't practically learn the roots of the Halachas, that is, that they don't go back. They learn Shulchan Aruch, but they don't understand the sources that contribute to Shulchan Aruch. They tend to make Halachik mistakes, and the reason why they tend to

05:09 Speaker 1 make Halachik mistakes is because they see the bottom line but don't understand the circumstances that went into it. So the Rebbe is saying, when you see a letter or a psak, you're seeing the bottom line, and the bottom line doesn't have the circumstances. If it doesn't have the circumstances, you can't apply it. It doesn't just have to do with what's going on in its life, it also has to do with the person's soul, with the we-with the weighting of the person's soul. You have to figure out who you're dealing with. There's all these factors that go into deciding exactly how you're going to write to a letter, what they're going to do with the letter, how their soul is gonna respond to the letter, how their life is gonna respond to the letter. And when you take all that together, you really can't take something that's written in an individual letter and apply it, let happen to everybody. Excuse me. With that principle laid out, we can look at a couple more letters that the Rebbe says this exact point in his letter. So this is not about the Rebbe's letters, this is the Rebbe giving advice about how Rabbanim should write letters. But as we saw in our letter from Tamuz Lamed Heh, the Rebbe seems to keep that rule. He says it's meforsom, that when I answer an individual, that's not a Harav for anybody else. He seems to be keeping his own rules of how rabbis should function, that a rabbi's answer

06:06 Speaker 1 should not work for everybody. Uh, by the way, if a rabbi's answer works for everybody, then you probably didn't need a rabbi to answer it, right? If you have a question that is so clear that it is the same answer for absolutely everybody, then it doesn't take a psak, it just takes somebody who can open a book. When you ask a Rav or a Rebbe a question that is not answerable in a normal book, it should be tailored to you enough that it is not fungible. In any event We have, uh, a letter from Taf Shin Chaf Ches. This letter is labeled Tes Tov Zion. The Rebbe writes, . And it's a long letter, and I cut off the top of it because it's got a bunch of other things that don't have to do with us. It's one of these where it was written to a bunch of people, and then everybody had their own sentence. So one section of the letter written to one individual is, . I've already said many, many times the following. One, . Same thing as our letter. Point number one, I'm not responsible for what other people say that I said. And two, that the answer that I give one person, one individual person certainly doesn't obligate anybody else, and certainly, certainly doesn't obligate an institution. So I think that, uh, we all-- Again, we don't know what the question was here, but, uh, the question was clearly something along the lines of you told Avram X, and

07:09 Speaker 1 therefore we think that our Chabad house should do Y. And the Rebbe goes, "I told Avram X, first of all, don't trust what you hear that I said to other people. Maybe I didn't say it. And second of all, just that I told Avram doesn't mean that it applies to Yitzhak, and certainly doesn't mean that it applies to a Chabad house. You gotta understand that I'm speaking to the individuals, so don't go applying my letters willy-nilly." And number three has nothing to do with us, but it's here, and we may as well read it. That whatever this person's situation, family situation is, it's getting in the way of his, uh, of his restful-- of his rest, of his, uh, relaxation, calmness. I think that isn't, it doesn't apply when he's in Yerushalayim. This all seems to be getting in the way of how he does his work. Why do we need that? We don't. I just wanted to read it 'cause it was a sentence on the page. Okay, so we have here our, uh, our s- a, a letter that's almost identical to what we have in our year. Taf Shin Lamed Dalet, two points from the Rebbe. Point number one is that don't trust everything you hear in my name, and point number two is it should be well known by now that when I answer an individual, this doesn't obligate a different individual to listen to that letter because it wasn't for them, and it certainly shouldn't obligate an institution. Now, how

08:09 Speaker 1 often do... Uh, uh, it's, it's fun to point fingers, but how often have you seen this happen? I mean, this is something that is, uh, this is probably the most abused thing in the Babich maybe, is that, uh, is that you'll see a letter to an individual and assume that it's also to you. In addition to that, you might apply it to a Meisa. You have Meis just quoting letters from individuals. The Rebbe says here, without, uh, and I'm adding a note, without a Mashpia to help tell you whether this applies or not, the basic understanding should be that a letter read from the Rebbe does not apply to another person, and certainly doesn't apply to a Meisa just 'cause it was written to the individual. He gives the Bracha for and we move on to our next letter. Next letter is from the year Taf Shin Chaf Vav. We went back in time. I don't know why I put them in this order. The letter is labeled Tes Mem Gimel, and this is written to a woman. It's a slightly longer letter, and we will read, uh, the first two paragraphs of it. Bracha V'Shalom, the Rebbe writes, in answer to your question. or your, your letter, excuse me. Took a while to get to me. So this woman had written a letter to the Rebbe and gotten a certain answer. Her friend had written a letter to the Rebbe and gotten the opposite answer, and she writes back to the Rebbe saying, "Since

09:10 Speaker 1 you answered my friend differently than you answered me, does that mean that I should alter the answer that I got from you?" I don't know. I, I c- again, in most of these cases, th- in all of these cases, we just don't know what questions they ask. They're not recorded below the line here. You can imagine that this, uh, that, that if, if you send a letter to the Rebbe and he tells you that you can do something, and then your friend sends a letter to the Rebbe and the Rebbe says that she can't do something, you have to wonder if maybe the Rebbe's opinion has changed. So she writes back and says, "Am I supposed to follow your most recent letter in general or your most recent letter to me?" Which is a good question. The Rebbe answers, . Nope. One answer has nothing to do with the friend's answer. It depends on the individual I'm writing to. Even if the question was exactly one hundred percent the same, that's very important here. 'Cause what we like to say is that if I was one hundred percent sure the Rebbe was dealing with the exact same case, I could apply the let- the letter to my life. The Rebbe says, "No, not at all. Even if you are completely sure that the question that was asked was one hundred percent the same as the question that you're asking, my letter is not to you, so it might not have anything, have anything to do

10:09 Speaker 1 with you. Because my answer is dependent on the way that you ask the question and on the style of the question. And also on the soul and on the qualities of the person who's asking the question. And in most cases, not all cases, but in most cases, that influences my answer and that should be easy for somebody to understand. This is, uh, a super important letter for us because here he's saying that even if you were to line things up perfectly and you were to find somebody, "I have a question. I found that the Rebbe addressed this exact question in a letter. Isn't that incredible?" Not necessarily. It might be that it's not for you. This again needs a Mashpia, it needs to te- need, need, need, needs, uh, it's something people need to be more careful about. Because just because the contents of the letter are exactly the same does not mean that the Rebbe's answer is meant for you. Maybe you have a different soul than the person who he answered. Maybe your question's asked in a different way than the person who the Rebbe was answering. You have a . As far as I know, this isn't published anywhere yet. I found this in a Torah. But this is a . I confess that I can never read a . If they don't put the, uh, text right next to them, I have no idea what it says. But fortunately, they did put the text next to it in the Torah. The

11:10 Speaker 1 text says, . I can see it now. I mean, once, once I see it, I can see it, but I can't see it initially. Seriously, when you, when you read here, are you able to figure out what it says before you look at the text? Yeah, I can never do it. The Rebbe's handwriting-

11:21 Speaker 2 Most cases.

11:22 Speaker 1 I can never do it.

11:22 Speaker 2 As a matter of fact, I just tested myself on this one.

11:24 Speaker 1 Yeah, did, did, did you get it? Nice.

11:27 Speaker 2 Yeah.

11:27 Speaker 1 I have s- I have so much trouble with the handwriting. Okay. So . As we've spoken about many, many times, this is a stronger word, even stronger words. The Rebbe says, "As I've said many, many times, my answer to one person, not only is it not a , not only is it not a a ruling for another person, it also isn't even a . It's also not even an answer to another person. You can't even say that I would rule differently, but, but the answer is applicable to you. If it wasn't written to you, it's not for you. It has nothing to do with you." This is, uh, these, these are strong words when it comes to somebody studying Igress, but also something that's important to keep in the backs of our heads. I have one more letter that we'll look at, and then we'll, uh, and then we'll talk about it. This one is designated Yud Alef Shin Yud is the one that we're reading, and it says what is attached. I was very surprised when I read what you wrote and what is attached there. First of all, says the Rebbe- Uh, . First of all, I need to announce many times that what is said to one person has nothing to inform the second person at all. It's not an answer at all to the . Uh, again, this is a slight emphasis over the things we saw before. We saw higher up that, uh, that when the Rebbe gives a or

12:35 Speaker 1 a , it doesn't apply to another person. Here we're seeing sort of echoes of what we saw in the , which is that not only is there not a here, there's also not even a . So we see this here again. . That's even stronger. That is, I have now to announce many times that when I write a letter to one person, that is not an answer at all. Now, not that it's not just, uh, not a , not that it's not a answer. It's not an answer at all. It has nothing to say to somebody else because I wrote it to that person. Uh, , whatever he wrote about, the Rebbe doesn't wanna mix into, and he goes on to say other things about running this yeshiva. But the part that we need is point one, which is that the Rebbe is saying that when he writes a letter to one individual, it has no at all to anybody else. That's the last letter that we have on the page. We obviously have a lot to discuss because it's slightly disturbing material, I think. Um, it's certainly disturbing for our shiur. What we try to do here is to get enough letters from the Rebbe that we develop a , but the Rebbe is cautioning us across at least six letters that this is not how letters are to be used, which really does raise a question about reading the letters in the first place and trying to apply them to our lives when

13:37 Speaker 1 the Rebbe says so specifically that not only is there not a in there for you, there's not a in there for you, it's not even a , not a . This certainly does put a damper on the activities. I don't think it has to put a damper on how we learn Igris and how we apply Igris, even how those who do Igris do Igris. I think it just emphasizes for the three hundredth time the importance of doing these things with a . When you're ready to take these things out of the, out of the theoretical and put them into the practical, doing it on your own is a minefield. And one of the reasons is that the Rebbe himself in these letters says over and over and over again that you cannot necessarily apply what I write to another person. What the Rebbe also says is when you talk to a , you're speaking to someone who's connected to him and can help you understand what the Rebbe really wants. So I think with a help, it's still in play, but without a help, somebody wants to solo Igris, they have a minefield of at least six letters telling them that it's not going to work. And I think that's a, a very strong, a very strong indication that if you want to apply what you read in Igris to your life all by yourself, you're definitely putting yourself at risk of getting the wrong idea. But let's discuss.

14:32 Speaker 2 No, I think, I think there's a very distinct difference. I think there's two distinct differences. Number one, what we're doing here by building a is finding common thread, right? We're not taking one individual from the Rebbe to a individual and saying, "We're going now to create a based on this." Vaharan, you had a question about the flag, right? We found, you found one letter, therefore nothing really to develop a, a or a general understanding of how the Rebbe would feel about something. When you see six letters of somebody saying, you know, the Rebbe telling the person that, that, that, that the, that, that the letters are meant for individuals and other people shouldn't learn from it, this seems to be quite clear that that is the . The is that don't learn from individual letters. I think that's key number one. Number two is the way that people do Igris or use Igris or, or whatever the proper terminology for that would be today, is that they do it in a way where they're looking for that to become an individual response. They're not looking-- There's two ways to go about it, right? There's one way to go about it where you go look through the in the back of this, back of the Igris, and you look at where the Rebbe dealt with people having, uh, kidney surgery and look up those things and try to develop some sort of a of what the Rebbe says about kidney surgery, which may or may not

15:43 Speaker 2 be the right thing if there's very individual answers and not one theme through all the answers. Another one is when I'm randomly opening up a Igris and using that as, like, my individual answer, that's just as much as a person getting an individual answer which is not meant for anybody else. I'm not using somebody else's answer. This is my answer.