1. Recording Customs. I1 once asked my revered father-in-law, the Rebbe [Rayatz]: “Why had [the distinctive Chabad-Lubavitch] customs not been recorded in writing?”
He replied: “That subject was not the primary concern [of chassidim of earlier times].”
So I said: “But there are many matters affecting actual conduct that chassidim need to know.”
He replied: “It really is a pity that they were not recorded.”
Accordingly, whenever I observed a custom practiced by my revered father-in-law, the Rebbe, I made a note of it. As to the customs that apply to chassidim at large, I understood from him that it would be appropriate to make them known.2
2. The Rebbe Rayatz as Sandak. It so happens that I was once present at a circumcision3 at which my revered father-in-law, the Rebbe [Rayatz], was honored with serving as sandak,4 and I recorded several practices in my notes:5
He asked to be given his own tallis, and [nevertheless] he put it on without reciting a blessing.. The Rebbe did the same when honored with being sandak at the present circumcision.
[Moreover,] the circumcision took place three or four hours after the morning prayers; that is, after a longer time than any of the defined intervals6 which [in various contexts] constitute an interruption7 [that would warrant the repeated recitation of a blessing]. For example, as we find in the Alter Rebbe’s Shulchan Aruch: until one has diverted his attention [from the mitzvah at hand];8 after the lapse of two hours;9 and the like.10 Nevertheless, he put on his own tallis without [repeating] the [morning’s] blessing.
Though he could have put on a borrowed tallis, in which case no blessing would be called for,11 he specifically put on his own tallis, and did so without reciting a blessing — as a directive that there is no need to repeat the blessing, even after the relevant interval has elapsed.
During the time he held the infant I noticed that he looked very pale, and at the actual moment of circumcision he turned aside like one who cannot stand the sight of blood.500 This is remarkable, because he was a qualified shochet,12 and despite that he turned aside like one who cannot stand the sight of blood.
I also observed that throughout the time of the circumcision his lips were whispering something.500 I don’t know what words he said at that time, but I saw that he was saying something. I asked him later what he had been saying. [The Rebbe added with a smile:] I added that this was a matter of practical application, so that if at some time I should be honored with being a sandak, I would know what to say.... But he gave no answer.
[The Rebbe concluded:] Nu, it’s true that I don’t know what he said, but at least I know that he said something.
3. Refining One’s Action, Speech, Thought. At the festive meal13 following the circumcision, my revered father-in-law said:14 “In the era since the Giving of the Torah, the stages in our Divine service are: first, removing the foreskin of the body, that is, [refining] the faculty of action; next, removing the foreskin of the tongue, that is, [refining] the faculty of speech; and then, removing the foreskin of the heart, that is, [refining] the faculty of thought.15
“With Avraham Avinu, who lived before the Giving of the Torah, the sequence was the reverse: ‘at age three he recognized his Creator’16 — thought; he then made G‑d’s existence known in the world17 — speech; and then came the actual circumcision18 — action.
“But with us, we must begin with what is most important — action.”
4. Action is Uppermost. My revered father-in-law, the Rebbe [Rayatz], related19 that for the bris of one of the grandsons of the Tzemach Tzedek, a choice had to be made between two circumcisors. One was extremely proficient in his craft, but was not particularly at home in the Kabbalistic meditations involved. The other mohel was devoutly steeped in those esoteric meditations, but was less reputed as a craftsman. The Tzemach Tzedek directed that the superior craftsman be preferred, and explained: “Action is uppermost.20 Indeed, it is uppermost at such a lofty level that there is no need for an address to be given.”21
The Rebbe [Rayatz] then commented: “At first glance, one might explain this by saying that the reason for preferring the superior craftsman, even though he was less adept at Kabbalistic meditations, is that these kavanos were undertaken by the other candidate. After all, we find in various contexts that the devout intention of one person can also be effective for another person.22 However, the wording of the Tzemach Tzedek’s phrase, that “action is uppermost,” implies that action in itself is quite sufficient, and that [in this setting] the kavanos are dispensable.
5. Lights and Vessels. Let us further explain the central role played by action, in the commandment of circumcision.
This mitzvah has a distinctive characteristic that is unique among all the mitzvos (except for korban Pesach, the sacrifice of the eve of Pesach23 ): though circumcision is a positive commandment,24 transgressing it is punishable by excision.25 In all other cases, this sanction applies only to the transgression of prohibitive commandments.26
To clarify:27 It is explained in the teachings of Chassidus28 that the prohibitive commandments have a certain superiority over the positive commandments, in that the positive commandments relate to vav and hei, [the two lower letters of the Four-Letter Name of G‑d,] whereas the prohibitive commandments relate to yud and hei, [the two higher letters of that Name]. The rationale: By fulfilling the positive commandments one calls forth [the currents of spiritual energy that are termed] “lights” that are capable of being contained in “vessels,”29 and this is why these lights are elicited by action. By observing the prohibitive commandments, by contrast, one calls forth [spiritual] lights that are so lofty that they cannot be vested in vessels, and this is why these lights are elicited — spontaneously — by the absence of action. They cannot be elicited by action.
Now, it is true that there is something superior about eliciting light that can be vested in vessels, and this is why,30 [if they clash,] “the performance of a positive commandment overrides the observance of a prohibitive commandment.”31 Nevertheless, the prohibitive commandments are superior to the positive commandments — because their observance elicits a superior light, a light that is too lofty to be vested in vessels.
This superiority also explains why, [as a rule,] the sanction of excision applies specifically to prohibitive commandments.
Hence, since neglecting the [two positive] commandments of the Pesach sacrifice and of circumcision is punishable by excision, we must conclude that they stand at the same exalted level as the prohibitive commandments, by whose observance one calls forth [spiritual] lights that are too lofty to be vested in vessels. Moreover, even the lights that are too lofty to be vested in vessels, which generally cannot be elicited by action, but only by the absence of action (i.e., by the observance of the prohibitive commandments), are elicited through the fulfillment of the [positive] commandments of the Pesach sacrifice and of circumcision — by action.
6. When Two Commandments Clash. The above concept throws light on the teaching of the Sages32 on the superiority of the commandment of circumcision over the commandment of Shabbos: “Shabbos... is equivalent to all the commandments in the Torah, yet circumcision supersedes it.33 By way of analogy: Two noble ladies are walking towards each other [on a narrow path], and you cannot tell which of them is of higher standing — but when one of them steps aside out of deference to the other, you know that the other is of higher standing.”
True, “Shabbos is equivalent to all the commandments in the Torah.” Nevertheless, Shabbos itself comprises both positive and prohibitive commandments. And, as was stated above, lights are elicited and vested in vessels by action (i.e., by the fulfillment of positive commandments), and lights that are too lofty to be vested in vessels are elicited by the absence of action (i.e., by the observance of the prohibitive commandments); they cannot be elicited by action.
This is why the commandment of circumcision supersedes the commandment of Shabbos — because it has the superior quality of the prohibitive commandments over positive commandments (in the sense that it is reinforced by the sanction of excision), and its observance elicits lights that are too lofty to be vested in vessels; moreover, it elicits these lofty lights (which are normally elicited by the absence of action) by means of action.
7. Before and After Sinai. Why is this so? The commandment of circumcision (and likewise the commandment of the Pesach sacrifice) was given before Sinai.34 Though we observe it because we were commanded to do so after Sinai,35 that commandment also relates to the commandment to circumcise that was given before Sinai.36
(Incidentally, we find a parallel situation in the teachings of Chassidus: the Alter Rebbe’s Tanya relates to the manner in which Chassidus was revealed after his release from Petersburg [in 1798], even though it was written before that time [in 1796].37 )
It could be suggested that the distinction between (a) the way in which lights are elicited and vested in vessels by means of action, and (b) the way in which lights that are too lofty to be vested in vessels are elicited by the absence of action, first arose after Sinai. This restrictive distinction did not exist before Sinai. Therefore, by observing the commandment of circumcision, which was given before Sinai and that relates to that era, one can elicit lights that are too lofty to be vested in vessels — by means of action.
*
8. Looking Ahead. [At this point in the farbrengen, the Rebbe resumed his account of the circumcision at which the Rebbe Rayatz was present.38 ]
At the above-mentioned bris milah, my revered father-in-law, the Rebbe [Rayatz], donated twenty zlotys to the local yeshivah, as an advance payment toward the infant’s future tuition fees.39
This custom should be instituted at every circumcision — to make an advance payment toward the infant’s tuition fees for his future yeshivah studies.
[The Rebbe added with a smile:] First of all, it’s a good thing to give money to a yeshivah. But above and beyond that, since this custom was practiced by the Rebbe [Rayatz], it should be established as a standard custom.
[At this point the Rebbe gave the infant’s father five dollars to pass on to the yeshivah, explaining that this was the current equivalent of twenty zlotys at that time. The father asked the Rebbe if he could exchange these notes for others. The Rebbe gave his consent, and added:]
Though there are several stringencies in the laws governing the redemption of hekdesh, property dedicated to the Sanctuary, we do find that “it can be redeemed for less than its value.” It should therefore be emphasized that the amount paid in redemption should not be less than the value of the dedicated property.40
[The Rebbe then gave the father a Siddur Tehillat HaShem, and said:] By Divine Providence,41 this Siddur came from the printer today. It includes a biographical outline of my revered father-in-law, the Rebbe [Rayatz]. It should be kept for the child until he grows up and goes to the yeshivah, and in this Siddur he should learn the letters of the alef-beis and how to read.
Start a Discussion