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
29 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.
AI Fyi,
Because that’s not how the modern day Frum world works.
Why clarify & be done when we can have a lot more fun watching Yidden engage in drama, accusations, loshon Hara, shmutz slinging, & Rabbi bashing?
To make it even more exciting…
I have in my possession the FIRST print of Bnei Brak (5741 on cover page, NOT 5742 as written in this article), and there – the titles on the Lubavitcher Rebbe appear in the beginning of the letter, but not the blessing in the end…
Also, the Shlah quote is missing.
More so, I’m aware of THREE versions of Volume 7 with notable differences (Bnei Brak, USA 1, USA 2)…
Two totally different unconnected things are being mentioned and mixed up here. There’s the Bnei Brak version which is definitely edited with a Bnei Brak bend in terms of Lubavitch, etc… and there’s cheilek ches and tes, which were put out by someone very knowledgeable and close to Reb Moishe who protected him in his old age. I personally was by R’ Moishe a few times in his older years and never experienced what Yankel Wolf above says. Be that as it may, I don’t think anyone here is changing their long entrenched attitudes on these issues because of whatever anyone else writes. S’zol zein shalom al Yisroel.
I’ll just point out that rav moshe sometimes edited the letters himself before printing. See, for example, the teshuvos Rav Moshe printed from R’ Shimon Eider which were written for Rabbi Eider to print them in his english sefer. If you look at the teshuvos in rabbi eider’s sefer, the shaylas are written in their full original format, whereas rav moshe paraphrased and edited them when he printed them in the igros. I believe I even recall some of the wording in the answers being slightly different.
I think it makes a lot of sense the R’ Moshe sometimes edited things in his teshuvos for the sake of clarity etc, and possibly added or deleted things that were unnecessary.
I think that would also explain why there were differences between what R’ Moshe wrote and what was printed.
This is all even regarding the volumes that R’ Moshe printed himself.
R. Wulliger is a quasi Chabadsker, a fellow traveler of theirs, with ties to them for decades. This past Nissan he was a featured speaker at a Lubavitcher Rambam Siyum (40 years of Rambam siyum 2024, a recording is at YouTube) on Eastern Parkway, at which yechi was recited three times from the dais in the early stages of the event before his address. Did R. Wulliger protest that? It was not a problem for him?
Even Haezer §4:107 is forged. The original printing (some shuls still have the old fashioned cover) said that a prenup is permitted but it should not be used en masse. The later printing removed that disclaimer… Hmmm.
Lemayseh,
Let me understand your position here. So if one visits 770 Eastern Parkway, according yo you they are considered a “quasi Chabadsker” and therefore what?
Is his Torah learning no longer counted?
Is his comments no longer valid?
Is the מחאה no longer valid?
When Reb Moshe came to 770 and met with the Rebbe, do you have a problem with that too?
Do you disqualify Reb Moshe as well for going to the Rebbe?
Sadly, many confuse the Lubavitcher Rebbe with what some who claim to be his Chasidim do.
P.S. Lubavitch is a Derech in Avodas Hashem based on the teachings of the Baal Shem Tov and the Baal HaTanya. Its not an international Kiruv organization nor is it any type of proclamation or anything of that sort. Lubavitch is Avodas Hashem through Chasidus.
NY edition Igros Moshe on the right, Bnei Brak printed edition on the left.
Correction: I think it should be reversed, NY edition on the left, Bnei Brak on the right.
They are arguing over a “P.S.” (post-script) which was not related directly to the topic of the letter??????
Reb Wulliger didn’t just visit 770. He was a main speaker at an major event where yechi was proclaimed from the stage not once, three times, as an official part of the program. And he didn’t say anything? But here, all of a sudden, he becomes a protester?
This doesn’t surprise me. As others have already found in Reb Moshe even haezer also additions or subtractions in order to effectuate a change in psak.
maybe they left out the brachos for the rebbi because they ran out of ink or space?
But that would not explaine leaving out kissing the tefillin!
Lemayseh, I was recently at a Kiddush Levana and heard the men loudly say, “Dovid Melech Yisroel Chai V’kayom”. I immediately demanded that the rov protest this proclamation, and explain to the congregation the “problem” that Dovid HaMelech had died centuries ago and is buried in his kever Israel. Aren’t you proud of me?
Is there a significant psak halacha that was changed? No. Of course not. So we’re posturing here. Posture away.
Where is the copy of the original ksav yad? I’m getting lost in the bnei brak vs NY editor prints here.
Cannot Rav Reuvein, his son, be consulted for clarification? Rav Dovid zatzal would have been the expert but…. Interesting how all this surfaced after Rav Dovid’s passing. Just saying!
Has someone been in toiuch with R’ Wulliger and informed him of his error?
BTw it is a major example of being dan lekaf zechus – no one who saw only the volumes he saw would realize what truly happened
Silly Jews
All tzadikim want moshiach to come
And true Tzadikim are humble.
And also, if you write a Sefer, and pay to have it printed, you edit it.
And if you care about your legacy, and it goes into a second printing, you re-edit it.
And if talmidei chachomim who you respect comment after printing, and you are zoche to another edition… You proofread, and edit….
yet again!
Ask a contemporary posek who has merited such success…
But l can tell you who is laughing in the Bais Medrash shel Gan Eden…
והאיש משה ענו עניו מאד מכל האדם אשר על־פני האדמה: ס (במדבר פרק יב פסוק ג)
Zushy, Hagaon Harav Leibel Wulliger Shlit”a, Rosh Kollel of Torah V’Daas and Rav of Khal Ohr Torah is a tremendous posek, baal halacha, lamdon and a world-class talmid chochom, who is refined and modest. He did NOT make a mistake. He pointed out a travesty, and it is being covered up with all kinds of excuses, denials, and explanations (many of which contradict each other).