This week there was a video clip circulating of a visibly agitated Yid, publicly protesting a deliberate modification found in the pages of the responsa of Maran Harav Moshe Feinstein ZT”L. The video went viral and outraged many, while others silently gloated as the changes, or lack thereof, was consistent with their respective narratives. YWN initially shared in the outrage as well, as this appeared to be an invasion of the Holy of Hollies and a blatant act to desecrate the sacred works of the Gadol Hador.
However, before rushing to judgement and conclusions, YWN opted to dispatch our investigative team to explore and inspect the content with the hopes of uncovering the truth.
On Wednesday evening, 22 Teves 5784 (January 3rd 2024) Parshas Shemos, a Shiur on “Various Shailos in Hilchos Tefilin” was given by Harav Leibel Wulliger Shlit”a, Rosh Kollel of Torah V’Daas and Rav of Khal Ohr Torah, for the amazing organization Irgun Shiurei Torah. Towards the end of the dazzling Shiur, Rav Wulliger prefaces his words by saying that he would to share something interesting, and that he had made copies of Rav Moshe’s Teshuvos for illustration. It seems that the Rav had handed out copies of the Teshuvos to the attendees, and proceeded to say that one of Teshuvos was printed in Bnei Brak and the other was printed in New York. The Teshuva that was being analyzed can be found in Igros Moshe Orach Chaim, volume four, Siman 9 and was written to Rav Menachem Mendel Schneerson, the Lubavitcher Rebbe. Rav Wulliger marveled at the glowing titles of reverence that Rav Moshe addressed the Rebbe with, and mentioned that the Teshuva discusses the Minhag of wearing Tefilin of Rabeinu Tam, and the Rebbe’s offer to have a pair written for Rav Moshe. Rav Wulliger then noted that in the Bnai Brak edition of the Igros Moshe, the Teshuva concluded with Rav Moshes heartfelt thanks for the offer, and request that they be written beautifully, specifically in Ksav Bais Yosef, (signed) Moshe Feinstein.
He then pulled out the New York edition of the Igros Moshe, and read that Rav Moshe had signed off the Teshuva with the following words: והנני גומר בברכה שנזכה בקרוב לביאת הגואל אשר מצפים אנחנו תמיד, מוקירו מאד, משה פיינשטיין / And I conclude with a blessing that we merit soon the arrival of our savior which we constantly await, with great appreciation, Moshe Feinstein.
Rav Wulliger expressed his wonderment and bewilderment at the decision to remove a warm blessing from Rav Moshe to the Rebbe, and further expressed frustration as this leads people to begin questioning and doubting the authenticity of many other Teshuvos. He continued and said that he personally had received a handwritten Teshuva from Rav Moshe regarding a difficult question, and still has the original, yet when it was printed in the Igros Moshe there were some important words that were modified and changed.
Rav Wulliger then segued into the topic at hand, and mentioned the next Teshuva (OC”H vol. 4 Siman 10) that discussed whether one is permitted to kiss the Tefilin Shel Rosh before placing it on his head, as it is in between the Berachos and may constitute a Hefsek. Rav Moshe refutes the proof of “Chacham Echad” that permits it, but concludes that logically it would seem that there is no concern of a Hefsek as it is a minor and brief act. And that is how the Teshuva in the Bnei Brak edition concludes. However, in the New York edition the Teshuva continues and quotes a “new” Sefer from the Shelah Hakadosh called “Mitzvas Tefilin” (8:4), who quotes both opinions and seems indecisive, and yet Rav Moshe concludes that he stands by his ruling to allow one to kiss them, similar to the opinion of the Avudraham that the Shelah quotes. Rav Wulliger again wonders at the logic of omitting the words of the Shelah Hakadosh, and concludes that in both of the aforementioned Teshuvos, the Bnai Brak edition felt that it was “necessary” to remove.
Rav Wulliger expressed his annoyance with the perpetrators and suggested that they visit the Kever of the Shelah Hakadosh, and of Rav Moshe, to ask for forgiveness.
After the Shiur concluded, the organizer of the event took the mike and opined that Rav Wulliger wasn’t strong enough in his condemnation of this heinous act, and declared that it was a tremendous chutzpa and needed to be condemned publicly in the strongest possible terms. He proceeded to bemoan the disrespect to the great Rav Moshe Feinstein who had showered the Lubavitcher Rebbe with prestigious titles, and yet the Bnei Brak edition removed his parting Berachos. He further lambasted the printers of the Bnei Brak edition for removing the quotation of the Shelah Hakadosh and the opinion of the Avudraham, and attributed it to the fact that it is not customary in Bnei Brak to kiss their Tefilin at that point, so they callously removed it. The organizer again reiterated that Rav Wulliger was too soft on them, repeated his dismay of this chutzpa and announced that his blood pressure had skyrocketed upon hearing of this abomination.
A lot has been written, discussed and debated regarding some of the ominous changes that are found in the different editions of the Igros Moshe. Scholars have dedicated years of their life to meticulously inspect the different editions, and they reviewed, scrutinized and compared every word of every volume and edition.
For this smaller scale and targeted operation, the first place to start would be the original volumes of Igros Moshe that were printed by Rav Moshe himself. Interestingly, in 5742 (1982) the sixth volume of Igros Moshe was printed both in New York and in Bnei Brak. In both of those editions, and bear in mind that they were printed during Rav Moshe’s lifetime, the parting Beracha to the Lubavitcher Rebbe does not appear, and neither does the quotation of the Shelah Hakadosh. Subsequently, another edition of that volume was printed in Brooklyn presumably after Rav Moshe’s Petira, and the aforementioned additions suddenly appear. Furthermore, in the original versions Rav Moshe does not sign his name after Siman 10, as was customary when the Teshuva was not addressed to anyone specific and was simply a clarification of a Halacha, whereas in the Brooklyn version his name oddly appears at the end of the Teshuva. Lastly, on the Shaar Blatt (title page) of the original volumes Rav Moshe writes his name and position in Mesivta Tiferes Yerushalayim in נוא יארק – New York, with נוא יארק properly spelled, whereas in the Brooklyn version it says printed by Moriah in ברוקלין ניו יארק – contrary to Rav Moshe’s spelling on the very same page.
YWN leaves it up to the reader to decide which edition is authentic, which edition appears to have been modified, and which of the editors should be traveling to his Kever to be asking forgiveness.
(YWN World Headquarters – NYC)
Join the official YWN WhatsApp status
10 Responses
אט אזוי
We need to stop the trend of Charedim acting like radical Muslims
I’m hardly an expert, but what I do know is that R’ Moshe used to write 2 copies of each teshuva, and it does ring a bell that there may be minor [inconsequential] differences between the two. Hence it wouldn’t be surprising if one company [Moriah] added based on the lengthier letter.
Further bear in mind that these differences/omissions are minor: His tefiallh at the end of one is not a bracha to the Lubavitcher Rebbe, nor any sort of allocade. I can’t imagine it was spitefully removed.
and a sh’lah at the end of the other is a bit more nefarious; however the theory that they omitted it because their minhag is not to kiss it is ludicrous, if not insane. {Especially since the sh’lah brings both sides.]
Lastly, the sha’ar blatt: Was that written by R’ Moshe himself?
Much ado about something, but not enough to warrant “outrage” “Chutzpah” etc.
Something doesn’t add up. Why is there different versions of a letter? The lubavitcher rebbes igros has over 30 volumes and also has different print houses in Israel and US. I don’t see conflicting letters in those volumes of igros. It doesn’t really matter which came first and which came second, the fact that there is different versions is NOT good.
Especially when the differences look political!!
I used to know someone named Heshy Pinter who spent hundreds (maybe even thousands) of hours comparing the Igros Moshe, and to say that there is a massive scandal behind the scenes that a very evil person did, is an understatement.
Someone removed titles that Reb Moshe wrote for people.
Very disturbing. I saw his pile of documents 25 years ago. Shocking. Someone should be mefarsem it, and the culprit should be held accountable and stop publishing his own seforim in reb moshes name (vehamyvin yavin).
Alter Mirrer, hameivin heivin, and now you have someone else to ask mechila from. BTW, the person to whom you are referring had a lot more connection to the Alter Mirrers and other talmidei chachamim from the previous dor than you likely ever did, and is himself a tremendous talmid chacham.
Why doesn’t someone close to HaRav Reuvein Feinstien shlit”a ask him about it.
I’m glad I have the Bnei Braq edition that is faithful to what Reb Moshe ZT”L felt should be included for print and what should not. Note the Bnei Braq edition does not include Chelek Hes, published 10 years after his petira, which is often referred as Igros another name, vihamaivin yuvin.
the same editor pushed everyone around there (physically). i still feel his sweaty hands on me dragging me to the door after asking reb moshe for a bracha for a sick girl. nebach i overstayed my visa for another 12 seconds when this doorman took over.
now we can read his edited notebooks
This is just the tip of the iceberg. Trust me.