This letter was addressed to R. Efraim Eliezer HaKohen Yolles, one of the leading Rabbis in Philadelphia.

B”H, 24 Adar II, 5711,
Brooklyn

Greetings and blessings,

I duly received your letters and was happy to read [that you are] progressing and managing well [in your new position] as head of the Rabbinic Court [in Philadelphia].1 May G‑d bless you and keep you.2 {This follows the opinion of Rabbi Yishmael, a kohen who supports the kohanim (Chulin 49a).}3 May you lead your flock in “peace and fairness” [Malachi 2:6; the following verse speaks about “the lips of a kohen.”] (and yet) “turn many away from sin.”4 In particular, this applies in the field of kosher Jewish education, for according to the reports [received], even the little pockets [of Jewish education] that exist are being reduced in a shocking manner.

There is a well-known adage of my revered father-in-law, the Rebbe, [coined] in the first years after his arrival here:4 “There is supervision over what is put in the pots (teplach). Why is there no supervision over what is put in the heads (keplach)?”

[There is a basis for using such a figure of speech.] See Chulin 45a: “What is in a pot….”5 And Scripture [compares the Torah to food,] stating:6 “Your Torah is in my belly.” Note [the explanation in] Tanya, ch. 5.

With regard to what you wrote concerning the number of kapitlach in the Book of Tehillim,7 see the introduction of the Minchas Shai to Tehillim, the introduction in the Reddleheim edition of Tehillim, and the commentary of Yafeh Einayim to Berachos 9b.

Enclosed is a receipt for the money you sent [to fulfill the customof giving] a half-shekel.8 In a spirit of wit, it is possible to say that what you write in that letter — that you still lack bittul — is nullified by your giving the half-shekel. [That gift] will nullify this feeling. For when a kohen gives a half-shekel, he grants it to the community generously and nothing remains of his ownership and possession [of it] (Shekalim 4:2) or at the very least [the connection to him] is batel (insignificant) (Arachin 4a; see Rashi).

Nevertheless, “the priests interpret…,”9 for the very fact that he is willing to give up his right of possession implies that he shares a connection. For this reason, Moshe asked [G‑d] not to accept [the share of Korach and the members of his company] in the meal offering,10 even though it was a communal offering.11 See the conclusion of my note on p. 31 of kuntres 83.12

As you requested, I will mention you when I visit the gravesite on the day preceding the month of redemption.13

I am very disturbed by the fact that as of yet, R. … has not been able to establish himself in an appropriate position. A week enters and a week departs, a month enters and a month departs14….

To conclude with blessings for all forms of everlasting good,