A new edition of the Jewish review of books is out. I especially like their discussion on Chabad as well as the description of the Seforim blog discussion:

The question of Schneerson's rabbinic learning, his beard, and the couple's years in Berlin and Paris have been the subject of a furious dispute between Samuel Heilman and Chaim Rapoport on a popular Orthodox blog site, Seforim. Although somewhat self-righteous and bombastic, Rapoport has gotten the better of the exchange. Even on Heilman and Friedman's account, for instance, it emerges that during the period when Schneerson is supposed to have avoided Hasidic shtiblekh, he was piously fasting every day until the afternoon. Heilman and Friedman hypothesize that this was because he and Moussia were childless, but as Rapoport points out, he began the practice immediately after marriage. The fact that the Schneersons never had children is of extraordinary biographical and historical importance (if they had, the possibility of an eighth Lubavitcher Rebbe might have seemed more thinkable), but Schneerson would have had to be a prophet to begin worrying about this in 1929.

Well they're in the Bronx

If this be so, then the contentions of the defendant as to the inappropriateness of Yeshiva University and Planned Parenthood occupying space in the same commercial office building are of little moment. Indeed, the argument that there is a fundamental conflict in [***14] the outlook of these two groups with respect to the need and practice of birth control is a matter of theological disputation in which courts should not be immersed. "Be fruitful, and multiply" commands the Bible, (Genesis, I, 28.) But the Talmud recognizes the propriety of birth control by females to preserve life and health. (See Guttmacher, "Traditional Judaism and Birth Control", 16 Judaism, No. 2, pp. 159-165 [1967].)

Defendant's own witness, Dr. Alvin I. Schiff conceded that less than 10% of the Jewish population would find the activities of Planned Parenthood anathema to them, but felt the potential controversy that might be engendered even with this small but intensely devout group was ample justification for refusing consent to the sublease. If indeed the potentiality for controversy were a serviceable standard for measuring the acceptability of a subtenancy, many of our most socially useful institutions would be homeless vagrants on the streets, and [*37] our buildings would be [**163] tenanted by bland, unexceptionable models of propriety and dullness. Even proponents of unpopular ideas are entitled to a roof over their heads. Landlords are not censors -- [***15] their dominion is over realty, not ideas. Their ownership of property does not confer upon them the right to reject subtenants merely because their ideas differ from their own.

The contradictions in the defendant's position are highlighted by the undisputed testimony that the Albert Einstein College of Medicine, one of the most prestigious components of Yeshiva University gives a course on birth control, that it sponsors four birth control clinics, and that its head of the department of gynecology and obstetrics also serves as chairman of the medical committee of Planned Parenthood. When asked if this was a source of embarrassment to the university administration, the answer forthcoming was, "Well, they're in the Bronx". In other words, since Planned Parenthood would be listed on the building directory, defendant is more fearful of being tarred with the brush of association by proximity than with association by actual affiliation! I find its fears that somehow the occupancy of space in its building by the executive offices of Planned Parenthood (not for a clinic or for public meetings, mind you) would inhibit the university's fund-raising activities are entirely without foundation.

American Book Co. v. Yeshiva University Development Foundation
297 N.Y.S.2d 156

A remarkable letter from R Moshe Feinstein

Published in the beginning of Chaim Bloch's pamphlet on artificial insemination - יהיו מחניך קודש



Marc Shapiro published a very interesting exchange of letters between R' Moshe and the Seridei Eish in Hamayan 34:2 pg (for some reason that volume is not yet on hebrewbooks.org). The letters concern attempts to persuade a man in Switzerland to give a get to his wife and they show the great efforts taken by these Gedolim to help this woman. I hope letters of this kind will be included in the new collection of R' Moshe's writings as they show his greatness not just as a posek but as a great leader who was genuinely concerned about those who came to him for help .

Dead Sea Scrolls dispute

Odd piece of post war Israeli history - Bloch Archive

Here. As I understand it, the Mayor of Bnei Brak (Aharonowitz) desired to go to the Gerrer Rebbe (at that time the Beis Yisroel?) for Yomim Noraim, however the Rebbe refused to have anything to do with the "group of betrayers" (Poalei Agudas Yisrael whom Aharonowitz apparently supported). He sent the Ponevizher Rav an R' (Moshe?) Landau to speak to the Rebbe on his behalf bu to no avail.

Bloch collection - R' Moshe Feinstein

Here is the only letter of R' Moshe Feinstein in the LBI Bloch Archive. RMF is sending Bloch 5 dollars for his book מי נתן and thanking him for reminding his wife because RMF is busy and had forgotten.

Bloch claims to have had more extensive correspondence with R' Moshe in his pamphlet והיה מחניך קדוש against R' Moshe's p'sak on artificial insemination (See also Igros Moshe EH 2:11). Bloch asked R' Moshe if he permitted him to publish this pamphlet against him. R' Moshe's response is a classic and well worth reading. I hope to scan and place online next time I have access to the pamphlet..

Bloch archive - R' Aharon Kotler and the early years of BMG

On pg. 453 of Reel 5 of the Bloch archive we have the following two letters from the founder of Beth Midrash Govoha, R' Aharon Kotler. I placed the letters at Scribd here (Thanks to S. and Parshablog for explaining to me how to do this):


Kotler[1]
I think the 2nd letter is particularly meaningful. You hear a great deal about R' Aharon Kotler's mesiras nefesh in "bringing Torah to America" however it is nice to see this in his own word. You can see his great pride in the achievements of "his bachurim" and the great difficulty he had in raising funds to keep the Yeshiva going .

The first letter most likely involves one of R Bloch's many pamphlet against HaRav Yosef Eliyahu Henkin and like most gedolim of that generation (as I will show in future posts), R'Aharon Kotler would take none of Bloch's nonsense. This despite the fact that Bloch seems to have been a donor to the Yeshiva (as per the 2nd letter).