Wednesday, June 22, 2011

"Ohel" kids books go mainstream!

Kehot and Merkos have decided to get into the "Ohel" books for kids. We have nothing add to our previous comment.

Readers at that site seem to have various opinions. Here are a couple that we can agree with:

just a thought..... wrote:
I wonder why, in all the forty years since Yud Shevat 5710 and 5752, the Rebbe never once instructed Kehos (or anyone else) to publish a book for children who would be visiting the Ohel?!

If there is obviously a need for such a book - wouldn't the Rebbe have seen and realized the necessity for such a book to be published way back then!?

Barring no other logical explanation, (which, I would certainly eagerly welcome,) I guess that Mrs. Tauger & Kehos don't share the same perspective of the Ohel as that of the Rebbe.

Response wrote:

As no one else has offered an explanation - I would offer this answer; Essentially, your question is a valid one. The reason the Rebbe never requested Kehos publish this type of book is because the Rebbe did not put emphasis on the Frierdiker Rebbe's tzion or histalkus to be greater than that of 770.

By the Rebbe - this was just one of many inyonim that are connected with the frierdiker Rebbe. But the eikar - the main focal point is 770, and not an inyan of a tzion, or a histalkus or a kevurah, or anything connected with an aspect that Chas V'Sholom - the frierdiker Rebbe is no longer connected with the gashmiusdiker world AS WE KNOW IT.

This explains why there were no books published or cafe's, social halls/clubs, cheders, shuls, tents, etc. etc. built or erected near the ohel of the frierdiker Rebbe - BECAUSE THE REBBE WOULD NEVER WANT IT OR ALLOW IT!!! - This (ie-the Ohel, histalkus, tzion etc.) IS NOT THE EIKAR!!

Fast forward to present day “Chabad” - and we find an array of books & publications solely dedicated to portray and illustrate the Rebbe in the EXACT OPPOSITE of how HE HIMSELF would portray & illustrate the Frierdiker Rebbe!?

I leave the conclusion for those who are not intellectually and emotionally challenged to figure it out for themselves. (Additionally, one may study the sichos of Yud Bais Tammuz 5745-1985 for additional points I may have left out.)


  1. And now available in 3 languages "Chagei Chabad for kids

  2. Um, this very question is rather odd, and stems from a major lack of understanding not only of the Ohel, but of the concept of a Rebbe as taught in Chabad in general. I am sure that the comments in this post were not written by Lubavitchers, nor are they familiar with the Rebbe's sichos and letters about the holiness of the Ohel. (I would also wager that they themselves have not been to the Ohel.)

    For Lubavitcher chassidim, the simple difference is that before Gimmel Tammuz the Rebbe was not in the Ohel, and so the main thing was to go to visit the Rebbe, and going to the Ohel of the Frierdikeh Rebbe was not such an emphasis.

    But now the Rebbe is in the Ohel, ba"h. So going to the Ohel means going to the Rebbe, even though we can't see him. Put differently, it's the equivalent of Yechidus today. I.e., one is not simply visiting a kever in the way that other kevarim were visited in times past, one is visiting the Rebbe who is our Rebbe now.

    Why shouldn't children be given literature suitable to them that explains correctly the practice of visiting the Rebbe at the Ohel, and makes them feel comfortable with it and excited about it on their own level?

    Any Chabad parent would want nothing more than for their child to have the uplifting, holy experience of visiting the Ohel, and 1. davvening to Hashem; 2. asking the Rebbe to davven on our behalf.

    On the topic of the Rebbe being our Rebbe now, see here.

  3. Not that they are equal, but I wonder if those putting forward the complaints about these children's books would also be opposed to taking children to the Me'aras Hamachpelah and Kever Rochel, because they are "cemeteries," or books explaining that holy experience to children.

    Concerning the appropriateness of visiting kivrei Tzaddikim in general, see the explanation here.


Comments will be moderated for language and content.
Please use your name/nickname - rather than 'anonymous'.