THE BREAKOUT YEAR FOR CHABAD IN MELBOURNE

From the life of R’ Yehoshua Shneur Zalman Serebryanski a”h
Prepared for publication by Avrohom Rainitz

Painting of Chassidim at Hakafos by Zalman KleinmanThe year 5717 was a breakthrough year for the Lubavitch schools in Melbourne. In earlier chapters we read about the efforts to open Beis Rivka even before Rosh HaShana, and in the coming chapters we will hear about the development of the new school for girls.

At the same time, the boys’ school, which had entered its third year, was growing. The new schools connected many parents to the Chabad community, which increased the number of people who davened at the Chabad shul. It expanded from Shabbos to Shabbos until there were times that 300 people were davening there! Every Shabbos there was a farbrengen after the davening and people were drawn to the Chabad chayus and joy.

People were attracted to the special joy of the Chabad minyan on Shabbos and all the more so on holidays, especially on Simchas Torah. Relative to other shuls, where hakafos were held without any special chayus, at the Chabad shul there was an atmosphere of genuine, unbridled joy.

The main rejoicing was on the night of Simchas Torah. After Maariv there would be tables laden with refreshments and many bottles of mashke. This was before the Rebbe’s “decree” regarding mashke, and Anash made kiddush and then sat around the tables to farbreng and sing niggunim. During the farbrengen, the mekuravim also said l’chaim numerous times. In a separate room sat the children around tables and the youth of Anash farbrenged with them.

When all were in elevated spirits, the selling of the “Ata Horeisa” verses began, to benefit the yeshiva. Then they left the farbrengen to form huge circles of dancing around the bima. Hakafos went on for nearly three hours as more and more people kept showing up to join the great simcha. Whoever arrived was immediately swept up into the circle of dancers.

DIFFERENCE OF OPINION OVER HAKAFOS

For hundreds of people, this was their first opportunity to get to know the Chabad community and many of them continued to show up in shul on Shabbasos the rest of the year. This was a golden opportunity to meet new people and draw them close to Torah and Chassidus.

However, this growth had a downside. Some of the visitors on Simchas Torah came to shul in their cars and some of them unashamedly parked their cars right near the shul. Certain “friends of Lubavitch” made sure to publicize this and went to R’ Zalman to complain.

R’ Zalman told them that he could not prevent people from coming to shul and the only thing he could do was to register his protest. Indeed, before Simchas Torah, R’ Zalman advertised in the newspapers that it was forbidden to go to shul in a car during the holiday. And those who went to hakafos in their cars, even if their intentions were positive, to observe Simchas Torah, their actions were undesirable, and caused much anguish to the organizers.

Among Anash too, not all were pleased by the huge hakafos. Some said they should do away with it, stop making the kiddush and have brief hakafos right after Maariv, thus preventing desecration of the holiday. They said that Anash were anyway unable to reach out to the hundreds of people to have an influence on them, since Anash were very few, only twenty or so men versus five hundred mekuravim, and none of Anash was charismatic enough to address the crowd.

There were also those of Anash who thought they should continue with the hakafos, since most of the mekuravim came on foot without desecrating the holiday, and had good intentions, wanting to partake of the joy of the Chabad minyan.

Right after Simchas Torah, on 28 Tishrei, R’ Yaakov Eliezer Herzog sent a letter to the Rebbe and asked how to rectify what went on during hakafos. The Rebbe responded with a letter dated 18 Cheshvan:

Regarding your question: 1) How to rectify what happened on Simchas Torah. Among those who came to participate in the hakafos of Yeshivas Oholei Yosef Yitzchok were some who came in cars etc.

The rectification is simple and it is surprising that this year too it was not done, and that is some days before the holiday you should publish an ad in the papers (even better if it were done alongside the announcement about the times for hakafos etc.) that surely it is obvious and known that it is prohibited to travel in a car on Shabbos and Yom Tov and the inherent contradiction in participating in a Torah matter in a way that contravenes Torah.

ABSOLUTELY OUT OF THE QUESTION TO CANCEL OR SHORTEN ACTIVITIES

R’ Zalman also wrote to the Rebbe about it in a long letter dated Rosh Chodesh Kislev 5717. In his letter, R’ Zalman noted that an ad had been placed in the papers about not coming in cars, but despite that, some people still arrived by car. R’ Zalman’s question was about the following year, should they shorten the hakafos, thus affecting the joy of the holiday for hundreds of people, in order to prevent the desecration of Yom Tov by those few individuals?

The Rebbe responded in a letter dated 5 Kislev 5717:

In response to your letter of Rosh Chodesh Kislev, the month of miracles and redemption, and surely in the meantime you received my letter in response to your previous letter which also has a response about some of the questions in this letter.

Regarding what you wrote about the hakafos, surely the response about it was received by R’ Yaakov Eliezer Herzog and you saw it, and obviously the consideration that in the future, not making a kiddush, G-d forbid, and shortening the hakafos, are absolutely out of the question.

WAYS OF PLEASANTNESS COMBINED WITH THE REQUISITE FIRMNESS

In earlier chapters we read about the Rebbe’s response, “regarding the students who come from homes where the parents are not that religious yet, obviously you should try to be mekarev them as much as possible and the question about this is not understood.” These words of the Rebbe, to try and be mekarev them as much as possible, were a guiding light for R’ Zalman and he conducted the affairs of the shul in accordance with that directive.

Every so often, not yet religious Jews would attend shul and daven and recite Kaddish in order to mark the yahrtzait of their relatives. Some of them even wanted to daven for the amud and receive an aliya. With the approach of the “right hand draws near,” and in order not to shame them, R’ Zalman did not refuse their requests and he allowed them to daven for the amud and even to receive an aliya.

At the same time, when these Jews publicly desecrated the Shabbos, and certainly, when they arrived at shul by car on Shabbos, R’ Zalman had to turn down their requests, but he did so with utmost caution. It was this combination of “ways of pleasantness” with the “requisite firmness” that impacted on these Jews and some of them changed their ways for the better. So for example, it was told in previous chapters about the grocery storeowner who desecrated the Shabbos publicly by opening his store on Shabbos near the yeshiva, and when he wanted to be given an aliya to the Torah on Shabbos when his son was bar mitzva, the gabbai, R’ Chaim Serebryanski, explained to him, pleasantly and firmly, that he could not have an aliya as long as his store was open on Shabbos.

The man, who greatly desired having an aliya at his son’s bar mitzva celebration, immediately went to his store and told all the customers that they had to leave immediately and he closed the store!

Some of Anash did not like this approach of R’ Zalman and now and then they would go to him with complaints. One of the Chabad askanim, because of these complaints, stopped working on behalf of the yeshiva. Not only that, but when meshulachim (fundraisers) came from Eretz Yisroel on behalf of Chinuch Atzmai or the Vaad HaYeshivos, that askan accompanied them and helped them. When he was asked to help the fundraising for the yeshiva, he declined with various excuses.

After a long period of avoidance on the part of that askan, R’ Zalman decided to confront him about the matter. He visited the man’s house together with R’ Shmuel Betzalel Altheus. In the course of their conversation, it turned out that the askan was influenced by his father who held that religious Jews ought to separate themselves entirely from irreligious Jews and that everything should be done to emphasize this difference.

R’ Zalman told him that in Shulchan Aruch it does not state explicitly what the law is (regarding according honors to such people in shul). Therefore, he tried to exercise judgment on a case by case basis, and on principle he tried to skirt the issue as much as possible. However, when someone came and made a direct request, if he would refuse them, it would embarrass them, and therefore he acceded to their request, aside from, as mentioned, when it involved public desecration of the Shabbos and the like.