By COLlive reporter
Learners of the Daf Yomi, the daily regimen of studying a page of Gemara, have concluded the tractate of Nazir on Wednesday. Those using the Schottenstein Edition of the Talmud Bavli, published by Artscroll, have been left with an open question.
At the end of Nazir there is a Mishna that quotes a dispute between R’ Nehorai and R’ Yose on the subject of a Nazirite.Subsequently, the Gemara mentions another dispute between these two sages but on the subject of Birchas Hamazon.
On the surface, there seems to be no connection between both subjects or an explanation to why they would be correlated other than the individuals who are discussing it.
Attempting to explain it, the Artscroll Gemara writes: “The coming discussion [in the Gemoro, recurs verbatim in Berachos 53b]. It seems entirely unrelated to our Mishna, and for that matter, to the tractate.”
Rabbi Hersh Goldwurm and Rabbi Mordechai Rabinovitch, editors of the Artscroll Gemara, add: “It would appear that it is included here because, like our Mishna, it involves a discussion between R’ Yose and R’ Nehorai (For an additional explanation of the connection see the Responsa Emek Sh’eila, Reb Mordechai Dov Twersky of Hornstyple…).”
In the Hebrew edition of the Artscroll Gemara, the same question is raised but with other sources. But seemingly, again with no clear answer.
Rabbi Levi Garelik, an halachic authority in Brooklyn and Belgium who heads the “Sichos Academy,” says there is an answer to the question and it was given by the Rebbe in 5725.
“When the Rebbe finished saying kaddish for his mother, Rebbetzin Chana Schneerson OBM, the Rebbe made a siyum on Maseches Nazir,” Rabbi Garelik tells COLlive.com, noting that the subject is regarding Shmuel whose mother was Chana.
“One of the main questions that the Rebbe expounded on, was exactly this one, what is the connection, in content, between the subject discussed in the Mishna and the subject discussed in the Gemara,” he says.
Rabbi Garelik says the Rebbe gave “a beautiful answer” based on the Rishonim and the Sicha was later published in 5736 in Likutei Sichos volume 18, page 63.
In honor of the latest Siyum Hashas, Rabbi Garelik presented a conclusion of the tractate and answered the unsolved question.
VIDEO:
To view the class and study sheets, click here
My thought on reading the article was, how nice, what a great idea of Rabbi Garelik to make this shiur.
I don’t understand why the comments are so full of hostility. I don’t remember the Rebbe ever telling us ahavas yisroel doesn’t apply to the litvishen.
Did anyone actually contact Artscroll to let them know about this chiddush of the Rebbe? Maybe they will include it in future editions of the Artscroll Gemarah of Nazir. I’m really sick and tired of all these complaints against Artscroll regarding inclusion (or lack thereof) of Chabad material. One of the earlier commenters called them “Sonei Lubavitch”. I’m not sure how that comment was allowed to be posted, seeing that it is outright derogatory Lashon Hara and really doesn’t help anything. Is it a shame that Artscroll act stubborn in their approach to this? Certainly, but please, Chabad has such… Read more »
There are so many examples listed above in the comments of artscroll quoting chabad, that those who say otherwise are obviously ignorant. Kehos is basically barely catching up.
The issue is here totally different. They don’t have to quote from the Rebbe but when you get to a piece of gemore that is hard to undesrtand and you can only say it brings it down just because it is said by the same people that were previously mentioned whit out a connection and you can’t find another explanation and here you have an answer which connects even the end of the mesechte that makes you wonder if they omitted it because it is so unique that will open the eyes of thousands of learners to see the greatness… Read more »
your question is simply answered – that they will not quote the Rebbe (besides in Tanach-Rubin edition) but the money they got from Chabad Houses is kosher for them. I worked with them and know them very well
How many Lubavitcher moisdois have you walked in and there is artscroll seforim and how may litvishe moisdois have you walked in and there are Chabad Seforim. They claim as others have said they are printing for everyone apparently not…. Bottom line: This is a business. BH there are now two great shul chumashim that Chabad has produced as a result of omitting the rebbe. Hopefully more in the future.
check out what they write about ויפח באפיו נשמת חיים
they write in the stone chumash that “one who exhales, exhales from within” (zohar). Funny thing is that I don’t know anyone who saw that in the Zohar. The Rebbe says he couldn’t find it, but they did!
What about saying “Zohar cited in Tanya”?
It’s all part of litvish censorship. See this for another example: http://www.goldwasserstory.blogspot.com
Artscroll’s omitting the Rebbe’s Torah is a blight on their otherwise excellent work. But FYI: they do bring a very geshmake vort from the Rebbe in their translation to Navi Shoftim at the end of the story of “Pilegesh B’giva”. They cite to “L’kutei Sichos,” though most readers would have no idea how to find this vort in the vast material of L”S. M’inyan L’inyan, I heard from a someone who heard from the baal hama’ase, that the Rebbe sent a congratulatory note to R’ Frankel, from the Frankel Rambam, for his monumental work on the Rambam. This despite his… Read more »
Ok let’s be “fair”
They market their books to Chabad. Constantly sending flyers etc to Chabad houses offering discounts.
Over the years numerous Chabad rabbis and supporters have complained that they do not bring down a thing from the Rebbi and Chabad. There is even a huge scholar (rabbi MZ) who was “assigned” to provide them with sources.
And guess what??
Of course. They continue to completely boycott and sensor Chabad
To be honest everytime I go into a Chabad house and see a stone Chumash my heart falls.
They dont deserve to be on a Chabad house.
Period
Why are we even giving any attention to date yogi the Feb be said in mem chess that’s it’s “tachliss hasIna ageints the 6th Feb be. You can also ask about art scroll in many other cases for example gemora megila daf 7 when it says Raba shechted R zera the only explanation possible is the rebbes look what theye say
one solution is go use the steinsaltz, he has the rebbe’s bracho. i believe similar issues, saw similar complaint on the mesivta set,,, anyhow its time for a chabad shas if the steinsalt doesn’t do the job-i haven’t learned it that much in any case, we need to see more chabadniks to put down their facebook and col and go learn kvius itim, in the shuls and batei midrashim, we need more places to learn and more learning… go learn
i believe there was a source in artscroll chumash that a local rebbe in ohelei torah wrote to them that the source is really the rebbe, and i’m not sure if they changed it, but we have to be mekadash chabad and get the rebbe into their books too. chabad is mainstream judasim all over, just a matter of time… but we have to put our noses into the gemara more and the sfarim more, more batei medrashim should open in crown heights besides yagdil torah which is great, we need more people learning young and old-too often i don’t… Read more »
I have bee n recently learning the Rubin Edition Na”ch from Artscroll and many time it brings down Likutei Sichos and Sichos Kodesh stating their name as is.
I reached out to Rabbi Nosson Scherman and he confirmed that these commentaries are indeed from the Rebbe.
I’m not sure if there used to be a bias and now its not there or there never was a bias but in the above sforim mentioned the Rebbes commentaries are brought down many times.
Your comment that we don’t either mentions their gedolim is simple. Kehot in their mission statement is about disseminating the teachings of the rebbe’s of Chabad. that why you wont find anything else.
If artscroll would say clearly thaqt they are about disseminating the teachings of litvishe gedolim then I would swallow their ignoring chassidus and the rebbe’s teachings. But they profess to cover the entire gamut of torah sources and they are for klal yisroel. It therefore is a blatant anti chabad attitude that is so clear int heir omission of chassidus chabad and the rebbe specifically.
In the artscroll on Sefer Shmuel they bring the sicha on the story of Chana and Eili Hakohen. I guess they couldnt resist such a beautiful Sicha
The Hebrew artscroll on the last Daf of Boba Kama, answers one of their questions with the Rebbe’s answer, and they put the name as Toras Menachem.
If you want Artscroll to quote the Rebbe, maybe Kehos can quote the Vilna Gaon or other, non-Chassidish Gedolim. There may be questions left but there are times when you need another POV. There are 70 facets to the Torah… not just the one.
The original Artscroll Chumash does not have one quote from the Rebbe, even though there are literally hundreds of Gedolim (and ketanim) quoted there. When they published the first one or two volumes of their Chumash with Rashi, Lubavitchers met and asked how it was possible not to quote the Rebbe when there is so much of the Rebbe’s work on Rashi. They gave Sherman the Rebbe’s Biurim L’pirush Rashi al Hatorah and in the last two volumes (Bamidbar and Devarim) there are a couple of places where those Biurim are quoted – but on the page it does not… Read more »
What can be the reason they don’t want to mention the rabbi ?
Lest think why ?
There is something behind everything
thing i saw
the masecte shevuos was dedicated by michael gross in honor of a number of people in the end he writes in honor of the lubavitcher rebbe.
in the beginig of every gemara of artscrool thy write in honor of who the gemara was printed
even if the gemara was printed in honor of a long list thy write the whole list
by gemara shevuos no list to be found
just a interesting thing
Artscroll does quote Tanya.
Are we as chassidim looking to stick it to anyone that doesn’t quote the Rebbe? We finished Nazir, make a siyum at a farbrengan and invite R Sherman, repeat the Rebbe’s answer. Artscroll is not a Chabad organization. They don’t become Pasul because of this.
what you wrote is incorrect.
art scroll what contacted by lubavitcher chasidim
(i know who) and offered to give them the info.
at first thy tried to say we only write pashut pshat
put it was pointed out to them biorim from the rebbe that are poshut pshat put thy did not want to put in from the rebbe!!!
Perhaps they don’t learn chasidus or just don’t know Yiddish .
I am not here to defend art scroll, but I think this is the wrong example. If a great percentage of lubavitch ourselves, are not familiar with all the sichos, how do we expect others to know more. I have no idea if art scroll discriminate or not, but this would not be an example.
Lets not get carried away here.
Those in the know (as I am) know that artscroll has an almost total censorship of any of the Rebbe’s torah A group of learned shluchim and chassidim met with Rabbi Sherman years ago, due to the fact that many chabad houses go buy artscroll products, even at the meeting he was not forthcoming only saying he simply doesn’t have access to sforim A big supporter of theirs, also one who is close to Chabad told me he asked him about it and Rabbi S basically said chabad is exaggerating, and that Artscroll does in fact quote the Rebbe. In… Read more »
Your class is so very interesting. The story about the Rebbe’s wedding is fascinating. Very worth watching!
This point is wrong. Our seforim and publications are for us, we are not the base to promote any other gedolim or seforim etc. Artscroll (& others) claim they print for the entire klal Yisroel, if so there is no reason two omit any sefer or posek.
Rebbe’s marriage 1928
Met him JUST by the chassena
etc.
artsctrol write’s the the פירוש הכי פשוט
the rebbe’s biur is on a deeper level, and it is not the job of a pirush like artscrol to quote every deep biur, they are just explaining pshat.
I was learning Chitas and I noticed a similar difference between Artscroll and the Kehot Chumash. Parshas Korach. First Posuk. Korach challenged Moshe Rabeinu with a Talis made of pure Techailes and no tzitizis strings. According to the Artscroll “Korach attempted to convince the people that the laws taught them by Moses were illogical… product of his imagination… appointing Aaron… Also without Divine saction.” The Kehot Chumash “by this they (Korach, Doson and Aviram) meant to imply that since all the people are holy, there is no need for special leaders”. I find that the Artscroll wasn’t able to pinpoint… Read more »
such a big deal?
Thank you! But there is a more tactful way of expressing this point. You could have expressed more ahavas yisroel when writing the loshon in the article
Let’s face it, we generally don’t get any mention, they hold were koforim
Do Lubavitch seforim quote the ha’aros of Rav Moshe and Rav Elyashiv?
They repeatedly ignore all Lubavitch writings, shame on them
they are not the only ones its all over the place big deal who cares grow up have you just אנדעקט אמריקה
if you care publish your own
how about it
How can we expect them to quote the Rebbe when we never quote other Gedolim besides the Rebbe
Why is it surprising that they didn’t add it in?
it aint the first time
I don’t believe that art scroll brings down any of the Rebbe’s explanations or sichos in any of the gemorahs or in their chumash.
Not everyone is going to embrace the ideals we like. It would be nice if they brought the rebbe but let’s face it, it ain’t all that dandy. Are we always keen to mention litfishe gedolin in our seforim..?, no need to make a fuss. Life is tough, but a helmet.