Lag Baomer In The Eyes Of The Litvishe Tradition: R. Dov Halbertal’s Critique, Rendered Into English – ל”ג בעומר בעיני גדולי ומסורת ליטא

(Although I posted about R. Halbertal’s piece earlier this week, I noticed that many readers did not click on the link to his Hebrew article there, thereby missing out on the full flavor and power of the piece. Since I believe it reflects well, to a great degree, the viewpoint of the Ashkenazic tradition in general, as well as the Litvishe way, and is therefore worthy of wider dissemination, I decided to attempt an English rendering of it, which follows. It is not an authorized translation in consultation with R. Halbertal, so I cannot claim to have captured his every point and nuance, but I think it conveys his message, generally speaking.

Note: Some of the phenomena that R. Halbertal is reacting to may not be familiar to readers who have not been to Meron, as well as readers in the diaspora, so please keep that in mind before jumping to conclusions.)

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

In recent years, there is developing and spreading a phenomenon that sees in the Lag Baomer celebrations a מצוה גדולה (great mitzvah), which is almost obligatory. The day is not far when people will be embarrassed if they did not take part in the pilgrimage to the tomb of Rav Shimon Bar Yochai, and the celebrations surrounding it. All this with great support and backing, along with strong promotion, from the secular and religious media.

I do not come, חלילה, to damage the old traditions of ascending to the kever and kindling lights and praying there. However, in recent years, the phenomenon has gotten out of hand, exceeding its actual importance and proper boundaries.

Relating to such a phenomenon requires introspection regarding the position of גדולי ישראל, the great leaders of the Jewish people, with regard to it. In one of his talks, Rav Schach remarked that the Lag Baomer celebrations are not a ‘great mitzvah’ – that the Chazon Ish was very meticulous in his pursuit of mitzvos, and if it was such a great mitzvah he would have been pursued it, and ascended to the tomb of Rabbi Shimon Bar Yochai himself. Rav Elyashiv as well, was asked a great many times about it,  especially in the later years, with the growth of the phenomenon. His response was given in various formulations, such as ‘I was never there’, ‘Rav Shimon (Bar Yochai) is in the Mishnah’, and so on.

And if the Chazon Ish, Rav Schach, Rav Elyashiv, Roshei Yeshivos, and many other gedolim, saw in Lag Baomer a day to be emphasized with a strengthening of Torah learning, can we know better than they? What is all the great streaming to Meron, and the multiplicity of ceremonies, that lack commonality with the world of these paramount leaders, who shaped the way of Torah and the world of Yeshivos in the land of Israel?

The coarseness that surrounds the day threatens the centrality of Torah learning 

One can say that the great drift and the developing trend surrounding the day, that sees the celebration of Lag Baomer at the tomb of Rashbi as an obligatory commandment, stems in great measure from the fact that the chiloni (non orthodox) public, which seeks Jewish identity without properly finding it, finds it proper to perform commandments according to the inclinations of their emotions, which do not stem from a sense of obligation.

Similarly, the ease of traveling there, and the many ‘tikkunim’ that are performed for many problems there, encourage and contribute to the phenomenon. The various media contribute to the development of the phenomenon, directly or indirectly, by way of extended and detailed descriptions of the celebrations of the day, and interviews with public personalities and Rabbis who proclaim great importance to the ascent to the tomb and related matters.

The vulgarity that surrounds the various circles of the religious public at these celebrations threatens the centrality of Torah learning, and the understanding that that is the true will of Rav Shimon Bar Yochai, rather than the transformation of the day to a full day of celebration and partying, that is not accepted by the recorders of oral traditions, and transmitters of our tradition.

I write all this because, it seems to me, that people have even ceased to talk about it.

Rav Elyashiv, Rav Shach, and the Chazon Ish, זצ”ל, On Going To Meron On Lag Baomer: Rav Elyashiv’s Talmid (Student) Speaks Out

I just came upon, not long ago, a critical analysis by a mekurav of Rav Elyashiv זצ”ל, R. Dov Halbertal, להבחל”ח , that expresses well the point of view of very important gedolei Yisroel about the problematic nature of the Meron pilgrimage nowadays. Although it focuses on the viewpoint of gedolei Lita, namely Rav Elyashiv, the Chazon Ish and Rav Schach, זצ”ל, commenters mention that, להבחל”ח, Rav Ovadya Yosef and Rav Shmuel Wosner שליט”א also have taken similar positions with regard to the Lag Baomer event. So you have quite a spectrum of top level gedolim there expressing similar concerns.  Highly recommended reading!

Additionally, those that follow the news know about the chaos and צער that many suffered from in and around Meron this year in particular. Which reminds me of a story (brought in פניני מנהג – ל”ג בעומר, דף לח) regarding Rav Akiva Sofer, the דעת סופר. After he left Pressburg and fled to Eretz Yisroel due to the persecutions around WWII, one year he set out to travel to Meron (I am assuming to observe the goings on there). On the way, his vehicle broke down, necessitating lengthy repairs Whereupon he decided not to continue on to Meron then, even though things had already been fixed. He waited until after Lag Baomer to resume his journey, remarking that מן השמים, from Heaven, they do not allow him to go (on Lag Baomer), due to the קפידא (objection to the practice of the pilgrimage then) of his forebear, the Chasam Sofer. This shows how a גדול בישראל reacts to such phenomena. He makes a חשבון הנפש, he practices introspection.

וממנו ילמדו וכן יעשו, אכי”ר

What Lag Baomer Hype Inc. Doesn’t Tell You – Lesser Known Facts and Aspects Of ח”י אייר

We have written about this in the past (see here and here), but it bears repeating yet again. One should learn relevant halachos and mesoros in general, to be ready when a special day on the calendar approaches, but certainly in a case where there is a bombardment of advertising and hype not in accordance with our מסורה, it is especially important to review our holy traditions. In that spirit, I will share with you some things that have come to my attention while studying the sugya of ל”ג בעומר ע”פ מנהג אשכנז.

Firstly, let me say that it seems clear that a significant amount of the hype seems to be emanating from commercial interests. For example, travel companies that sell trips to Eretz Yisroel and Meron, charities that are selling tefillos and segulos, as well as those that advertise and market such things,

If you went by the impression given by them, you might think that the Meron Lag Baomer pilgrimage, as well as bonfires everywhere, among other things, are basic, universally accepted among כלל ישראל, and undisputed. However, that is actually quite wrong.

In posts on Lag Baomer in previous years, we mentioned very prominent authorities, great תלמידי חכמים, gedolei Yisroel, who rejected these practices. Some rejected all, some just some of them, or certain parts and aspects. But you won’t learn that from reading the hype ads and marketing material. One needs to dig a bit deeper at times to find out this info, which is sometimes overshadowed and drowned out by the glitzy marketing blitz from the others. It also helps if one is good at reading between the lines.

Tidbits From A Recent Work On Lag Baomer 

Anyway, in preparation for the approaching day, I was looking through a great compendium of information on ל”ג בעומר which came out a few years ago, a small soft covered work of over four hundred pages, called פניני מנהג – ל”ג בעומר by a R. Yitzchok Tessler from New York. Although the author is Chasidic, and much of the material in it is in accordance with the well known customs of some Chasidim, as practiced in Meron and elsewhere, there is still a wealth of information on other minhogim and variant customs there as well, which makes it a valuable source of information.

I will share some nuggets from there with you.

1) P.37 – Once a Chasid wanted to travel to Meron, but the Belzer Rebbe, R. Aharon Rokeach, did not permit him to do so, saying ‘the kedushah of Rav Shimon Bar Yochai is everywhere’.

This is similar to Rav Elyashiv zt”l, who never went to Meron, in over a century of life, despite living so long in ארץ ישראל, who said that he feels closer to Rav Shimon bar Yochai learning a blatt gemara, as well as to the Gerrer Rebbe, the Beis Yisroel (see #5).

2) P. 42-3 – Minhag Chalab (Aleppo – a prominent and important Syrian Jewish community, with an important diaspora as well) was not to make bonfires on Lag Baomer, as well as not to make chalakas (upsherin) in general, all year. This information is quite interesting, as it is not an Ashkenazic kehillah.

3) P. 58 – The Lelover Rebbe, R. Moshe Mordechai Biderman, did not go to Meron for Lag Baomer. Rather he went for Shabbos בהעלותך usually.

4) P.60 – R. Avrohom Yitzchok Kahan of תולדות אהרן (a Chasidic group in ירושלים)  told his Chasidim that in their beis medrash they have all the segulos, as in all the holy places (=not necessary to go to Meron).

5) P.66 – The Gerrer Rebbe, R. Yisroel Alter (the בית ישראל) said to a bochur that wanted to ascend to Meron, הרי יש לך את רבי שמעון בגמרא…(you have Rabbi Shimon ben Yochai in the gemara that you study…).

6) P.67 – The Vizhnitzer Rebbe did not go to Meron on Lag Baomer, and did not allow Yeshiva bochurim to do so. He only went after the day and only allowed older bochurim same.

7) P.126 – In Bavel (Iraq) no זכר to custom some have of lighting bonfires.

8) P. 126 -It seems that it was not commonly done in Yemen either.

9) P.127 – At the court of the Pshevorsker Rebbe, R. Yaakov Leizer (a famous European Chasidic Rebbe), the custom was not to make a bonfire, aka הדלקה.

10) P.133-4 – Perushim (פרושים) (i.e. devout, non-Hasidic, old time Jerusalemites, descendants of students/followers of the Gaon of Vilna and others) in Yerusholayim (ירושלים עיה”ק) did not celebrate Lag Baomer in the past in a major way. Even when a bonfire was lit nearby by Chasidim, and a Chasid came into the Beis Medrash and screamed at them why they didn’t come out to it, they didn’t pay heed to him at all, and not one went out. Note: This (the Perushim) is the community from which Moreinu Rav Yosef Shalom Elyashiv z”l emerged – so when he didn’t go to Meron his whole life (over a century, including approximately ninety years in Eretz Yisroel), he was reflecting these values of that tzibbur. Even the Chasidic celebrations there (in ירושלים) were limited in the old days.

11) P.190-2- The Satmar Rebbe, (the דברי יואל) went to Meron and was mispallel for children at kever Rashbi. He even promised, with his Rebbetzin, that if they had a son, they would name him Shimon (after Rashbi). But they didn’t have a son (all the stories about people having children after davening there, and then naming them Shimon, evidently didn’t pan out in his case. On the other hand, I guess he didn’t donate to Kupat Hair, maybe that was the problem. Even though it wasn’t around then yet…;-).

12) P.348 – At the Maharil (מהרי”ל) they would sometimes have a siyum for the tractates of gemara that they learned during the winter Yeshiva zman, on Lag Baomer.

13) Chapter 22, especially P.352-4 – Some who were far from Meron, even outside Eretz Yisroel, had a custom to visit other kevorim, קברי ישראל, קברי צדיקים, on that day.

14) P.367-8 – Some had a minhag to then learn Torah from the רמ”א, whose yahrzeit is on ל”ג בעומר.

15) P.419 – In סקווירא they are noheig hilchos uminhogei sefira even on Lag Baomer (that seems to imply even with regard to music. With regard to haircutting, there are others who do so, more or less, as well, such as Belz, Lubavitch, and others. ע”פ האר”י ז”ל).

More About Bonfires Specifically

I would like to make some other comments re bonfires. Namely, that it seems that it was not the practice even among some other very prominent Chasidic groups, in addition to those mentioned previously, above and in previous posts, in the past and/or present as well.

For example, with regard to Lubavitch, it is brought down on P.122 of the above cited work, that the Rebbe Rashab gave orders to purchase the first hadlokoh in Chevron one year. But I don’t recall seeing any mention of him having one in Lubavitch itself. I don’t recall seeing that the last Lubavitcher Rebbe had one at his court either (although I wasn’t there .

On p.126 it is brought that in recent years there a large bonfire near the large Belzer Beis Medrash (in ירושלים עיה”ק). The implication is that it was not done previously. Also, interestingly, it states that the Rebbe gazes at it from his porch. Which indicates a distance and perhaps distancing of himself from it somewhat as well. Interesting.

Bobov doesn’t have a bonfire hadlokoh at the Rebbe’s court either (info from Bobover Chasidim). Interestingly, also re Bobov, it seems that they do not have or did not have musical instrumental accompaniment on Lag Baomer as well (brought in above mentioned work and heard from a Bobover).

Now those are major Chasidic groups, not just a few people. So the point is that the bonfire custom, especially outside the Holy Land, ארץ ישראל, is by no means a universal, long time practice.

בתפלה להשי”ת that we have a good and safe Lag Baomer, ברוחניות ובגשמיות…

אכי”ר

Minhag Insanity In Our Time: A Cautionary Tale מנהג שטות, מנהג שוטים, מנהג רע, מנהג סכנה

Although today is Purim, this post is 100% serious (as one should be on Purim .

Yeshiva World News reports (English), about a new ‘minhag’ in Eretz Yisroel in recent years among the young, namely fireworks on Purim, which has now led to an eye injury to a youngster. As if there were not already enough questionable practices engaged in by some on Purim. See also the report at לדעת in Hebrew, as well as the one at JDN.

I realize that it may not be too widespread, perhaps just among certain limited types of children with chinuch deficiencies, but nevetheless it is disturbing.

What do we see from this?

1) New ‘minhagim’ are still developing in our time.

2) Not everything from Eretz Yisroel is holy and proper. אוירא דארץ ישראל מחכים, the teaching of Chazal that the air of Eretz Yisroel imparts wisdom, does not mean that there is no foolishness or יצר הרע in ארצנו הקדושה.

3) One has to be on guard against questionable practices.

We are taught that מנהג אותיות גיהנום (attributed to רבינו תם) – minhog and gehinom have common letters. A way of reminding us that something being a ‘custom’ of some sort among some people, is, in and of itself, not a guarantee that it is actually proper practice.  Here I think we have a good illustration of that.

In the zechus of being medakdek in minhogim, observing our מנהגים טובים and avoiding those that are out of order, we should be zoche to a kosher, freilich, and safe Purim, און א גוט געבענטשט יאהר!

Rav Ovadia Yosef Praises Ashkenazim – הרה”ג חכם רב עובדיה יוסף שליט”א משבח האשכנזים

I was recently watching some video footage from a multi-part series that was aired in ארץ ישראל on one of the great gedolim of our time, הרה”ג חכם רב עובדיה יוסף שליט”א.

The series in general was quite interesting, but one thing, relevant to the subject matter focused on here, especially caught my attention, in one of the segments.

It is when his daughter says, regarding her father, as follows:  אתה יודע מה? פעם אבא התבטא והוא אמר שהאשכנזים יודעים יותר טוב מהספרדים להעריך מה זה תלמיד חכם. Which the accompanying English rendering gives as “You know what? One time my father stated that the Ashkenazi people know better than the Sephardic how to appreciate a wise student”. Now it is clear that they erred by translating תלמיד חכם as ‘wise student’. It should rather be Torah scholar, or something similar. But however you translate the statement exactly, you still have the great Sepharadic Gaon and champion of the ספרדי mesorah and heritage paying a fine compliment to his Ashkenazic Jewish brethren. Very nice and interesting.

The segment can be seen here starting at 5:28

I wonder what the context of the remark was, by the way.

It reminds me of Rav Yosef Karo, the בית יוסף, and מחבר of the שולחן ערוך, bringing the famous תשובה of the רא”ש, where he says that the Ashkenazic mesorah is superior to that of ספרד, without taking issue with it (טור יו”ד סוף סימן פ”ב). Rav Ovadia is a big advocate of the authority of Rav Yosef Karo, who he calls מרן. And here, he is also doing a similar thing, by praising the Ashkenazim. It is also in the tradition of words of praise by the Rambam, Ramban, and other Sepharadic gedolim over the years, for the great Ashkenazic Torah heritage.

אשרי העם שככה לו, אשרי העם שה’ אלקיו

א גוטען שבת

Hamaayan review of Yerushoseinu – סקירה בהמעין על קובץ ירושתנו של מכון מורשת אשכנז

The prominent Torah publication המעין recently put out their first issue for the year 5773. In it there is brief review of the last issue of the Machon Moreshes Ashkenaz annual ירושתנו, with some nice words and additional relevant information.

It can be seen here, about 4/5 of the way down the page.

Enjoy!

How To Profit From Our Prophets: Guidance from Rav Breuer On The Important Study Of Tanach – רב ברייער זצ”ל על נחיצות לימוד התנ”ך ודרכו בכך

In the previous two posts, we wrote about Rav Breuer’s derech in learning תורה שבעל פה, the oral Torah. As important as that information is, it needs to be supplemented with Rav Breuer’s attitude regarding the study of תורה שבכתב, the written Torah, in order to get a more balanced and complete picture of the derech of this גדול בישראל, this great Jewish leader, in Torah study, לימוד התורה.

Once again, we draw upon the important article of Rabbi Yaakov Lorch in ירושתנו , to inform us about this vital matter.

Here are some choice excerpts, from pages 67-70:

“He stressed that the Sifrei HaNeviim not be regarded as mere relics of the past, but must instead be understood as sources with contemporary relevance and power: “He who reads the Prophets as they should be read receives eternally sacred messages from their mouths….Rav Breuer viewed the Neviim as Divinely inspired leaders commissioned by God to assist us in comprehending the enigma of life.” He wrote “The Books of our Prophets are the immortal sources from which flow the Jewish consciousness and Jewish strength in an inexhaustible stream.”

“Rav Breuer saw the works of the Neviim as invaluable aids to understanding the history of the Jewish people within the context of world events. He saw the prophets as the quintessential “interpreters of the guidelines to history and mankind’s growth as laid down in the early pages of the Divine Book,” and could not imagine how it was possible to develop a comprehensive view of Jewish history without a thorough knowledge of the Sifrei HaNeviim. As he once remarked, “How can one understand world history without Yeshayah and how can one understand Yeshayah without world history?”

His shiurim in Tanach were exceptional, abounding with emotion and excitement, in the words of Rav Shimon Schwab זצ”ל.

Rav Breuer was deeply troubled by the fact that most yeshivos neglected the study of Tanach.

Rav Breuer’s grandson once told him his Yeshiva schedule, whereupon the Rav asked him “And when do you learn Tanach?” His grandson responded, “The rebbeim say we should learn it by ourselves.” To which Rav Breuer, displeased, responded “Do you think Tanach is nursery rhymes that you can just read it on your own?!”

In Rav Breuer’s words, “The profound importance and lofty significance of Gemara study cannot be stressed enough. But it is wrongly appplied if this means neglect or even elimination of the vast realm of other Torah areas.” He felt that the study of all aspects of Torah “is an irreplaceable source from which we all, in every age and especially in the youthful stage, may draw an inexhaustible wealth of ideological values which form the eternal reservoir for the strong Yehudi who is proudly conscious of his Divine Judaism.”

He held that while a negative attitude toward Tanach study by Yeshivos was understandable in the past when the ‘Haskalah’ movement threatened tradition and wanted to have Tanach study supercede Gemara learning, nowadays there is no reason for such an attitude.

Rav Breuer always kept a small Tanach on his desk and referred to it often. Every time the Gemara would quote a pasuk from the Tanach, he would look it up (finding it within seconds), and learn almost the whole perek where the pasuk was found.

When Rav Breuer would come to test the bachurim of the Yeshiva who were learning Gemara and mefarshim, his first question would be, “Where is the source in Chumash for the sugya you are learning?”

His grandchildren reported “When we came across a pasuk in the Gemara he would ask us if we knew where the pasuk was. If we answered wrong, he would be very annoyed.”

Let us try to follow the guidance of Rav Breuer here, and thereby, hopefully, gain the very necessary guidance we so need in our difficult times from the pages of the Tanach.

א גוטען מועד, א גוטען שבת, און א גוטען יום טוב

Note: For full sources and info re the above, as well as previous posts based on the Yerushoseinu article, see the complete article by Rabbi Lorch there.

Obsolete Relic, or Vital, Living Legacy? —————- דרך הלימוד של הרב ברייער ז”ל בימינו (Rav Breuer’s Derech Halimud In Our Time – continuation)

It was gratifying to see the interest in Rav Breuer’s derech halimud, which was described as “The Way of Old Ashkenaz”,  in the wake of the previous post. ב”ה.

Brisker Derech vs. Old Ashkenaz Way

In the discussion of Rav Breuer’s derech that we referenced, the words Brisk, and Brisker derech, did not appear. However, there was nevertheless a significant response in an online forum to it that came to my attention, which, if I understand it correctly, believes that Rav Breuer’s old Ashkenaz derech has been overtaken and superceded by the way of Rav Chaim of Brisk.

Is that true? If so, to what degree? Is such a development desirable? Are the two ways necessarily always at odds?

Should the old way be cast aside and treated as a fossil or relic, a quaint remnant of a pre-modern era (for those who haven’t already done so)? Placed in display in a museum? Left to the Chasidic world?

I think that the old derech is emphatically not obsolete and is vital for Yiddishkeit today. As Rav Breuer z”l strongly declared regarding תורה עם דרך ארץ, when some claimed that it was only a הוראת שעה, a temporary exigency. I think he would similarly opine regarding  the derech halimud we are discussing here.

Does that mean that the old Ashkenaz derech and the way of Brisk and related ways are necessarily always at odds? I think that there can be a modus vivendi actually.

I think that the concern of some about the Brisker derech is at times more due to tendencies among some for premature and excessive utilization of it, rather than the derech itself per se. If there would be some limits on it (okay, perhaps not to the extent of requiring one to wait until the age of forty before engaging with it, as with the study of Kabbalah , perhaps their worries would be eased.

Brisker Derech and Psak Halocho

As it is, the Brisker derech/revolution is a mixed bag. While it has gotten some people excited about learning, there have been great associated costs as well. For example, the Modern Orthodox historian Rabbi Aaron Rothkoff (‘Rakeffet’) has stated that the Brisker derech ‘killed the Litvak psak halocho tradition’ (while there are Litvishe poskim in our times, such as Rav Elyashiv z”l, they are usually not heavy duty Briskers). Nowadays it is not uncommon to see some in the Yeshivishe world looking to the Chasidic world for direction in psak halocho, among other things, something which is not in accordance with their mesorah, and which can introduce practices not countenanced by their ancestors. Why is that? Because they have concentrated on lomdus at the cost of ways of learning which would be more conducive to developing ability in the area of פסק הלכה, causing them to look elsewhere for such. Would Rav Chaim Brisker be happy about that? I have my doubts.

Conclusion

So to sum up, נלע”ד that the old Ashkenaz derech, the derech of Rav Breuer, the Chasam Sofer, and so many others,  is not something to be retired, looked down upon, or shunted aside, חס ושלום. Rather it is something which is vital, enduring, and beneficial.

אמת ויציב ונכון וקים וישר ונאמן ואהוב וחביב ונחמד ונעים ואדיר ומתוקן ומקובל וטוב ויפה הדבר הזה עלינו לעולם ועד

Disclaimer: As usual, what is expressed here is the opinion of the writer, and does not represent the opinion of all his fellow Jews with the different faces (כשם שאין פרצופיהן דומין זה לזה כך אין דעותיהן שוות- מדרש רבה, פינחס).

Rav Breuer’s Derech Halimud: The Way of Old Ashkenaz – דרך הלימוד של הרב יוסף ברייער ז”ל

The article on Rav Dr. Joseph Breuer, הרב לוי יוסף ברייער זצ”ל, that we have been writing about in recent postings, by Rabbi Yaakov Lorch שליט”א, also discusses his derech haLimud. Here are some excerpts from pages 41-42 to give you an idea of how Rav Breuer learned gemara and other parts of תורה שבעל פה.

“Rav Breuer followed the derech halimud of his father, Rav Shlomo Breuer, who had been a close talmid of the Ksav Sofer….Rav Shlomo Breuer belonged to the school of the Chasam Sofer in his derech halimud…striving primarily to understand thoroughly the text at hand….learned with his talmidim only ‘on the daf’. Never did the Gaon come with prepared solutions to the gemara. He never discussed only those parts of the daf where he had something to be mechadesh….he strove for clarity in the pshat of the Gemara…He would never turn to the other Rishonim until Rashi and Tosafos were clear: in particular, he would get annoyed if one went right away to the Rambam…he eschewed any attempt at pilpul, and stressed the careful understanding of an inyan rather than hasty coverage of subject matter.”

In recent times some have replaced the above with different approaches. But the old way still has much going for it, even without invoking tradition, even if it seems simple and modest and lacking the fireworks and pizzazz of some newer approaches.  If more people today would follow such a derech, we would be the better for it, as a people. כנלענ”ד.

Calling A Bochur Of A Certain Age A Chosson, When He Is Not One At The Time

On pages 51-52 of the fine Yerushoseinu 5772 article on Rav Dr. Yosef Breuer z”l of KAJ by R. Yaakov Lorch שליט”א (which we drew upon here previously), there is a great story in a section about Rav Breuer’s מדת האמת (truthfulness).

It is related there that R. Yosef Schwab shlit”a, when he was a bochur, had learned shechita, and received a teudah (certificate) attesting to such from the shochet who had instructed him. However, he still needed to get kabboloh for it from a Rav. His father, Rav Shimon Schwab z”l, suggested that he go to Rav Breuer for that, which he did. When he showed Rav Breuer the teudah, which referred to him as HeChassan Yosef Schwab, Rav Breuer asked him if he was a chosson. When he replied in the negative, Rav Breuer exclaimed, No? Sheker, sheker! R. Yosef’s attempts to explain that that was a custom of people to call a bochur of certain age a chosson were to no avail. Rav Breuer was agitated, and repeated “This is sheker!”.

עד כאן the story, and now a thought that came to me.

There is a custom among some to call such bochurim for aliyos with the title chosson as well. I assume Rav Breuer z”l would strongly reject that custom, based on the above. Can anyone confirm?

In the zechus of being truthful, may we be zoche to a great new year.

Thanks to all for their support.

כתיבה וחתימה טובה – א גוט געבענטשט יאהר