Umedayeik B’Maamar Releases In-depth Commentary On this Year’s Basi Legani

Yad Menachem has released the next installment in their series of Umedayeik B’Maamar publications, by Rabbi Velvel Adler, which closely examines the exact Yiddish words that the Rebbe used when saying the Maamar Basi Legani 5726.

Spanning more than 150 pages, with over 250 footnotes, this year’s Umedayeik B’Maamar highlights many new aspects of what the Rebbe carefully wove into the Maamar. 

Here’s a sampling of what you can find inside:

Is a Jewish king greater during a Shemitah year than he is during other years? (see note 28)

Are all Otzros hidden? Can an Otzar be considered hidden and revealed at the same time? Is the level of L’mata Ad Ein Tachlis an Otzar? (see note 44)

If our Maamar intends to completely reject the possibility that Basi Legani 5710 is referring to the level of Yicholes, why does the Maamar indicate that there might be some room for such an explanation, while simultaneously calling it a Docheik? (see note 64)

Why does our Maamar seem to take for granted that when we say that Or Ein Sof means an Or which itself is Ein Sof, we mean that the infinity of the Or is Ein Sof Ha’amiti? (see note 74)

What does the Maamar mean when it says that Or is “Inyano Kishmo”? (see notes 83, 84)

Does the rule that a person does not fully grasp the meaning of his teacher’s lessons until 40 years have special significance with regards to the Amorah Rabba? (see note 138)

Why doesn’t Basi Legani 5710 explain the concept of Makif Harachok by continuing the same Mashal of Rav and Talmid which it used for Makif Hakarov, and explaining that even after 40 years, there are some aspects of the Rav’s intellect that the student will never grasp, despite these parts of the Rav’s intellect also having an influence on the student? (see notes 145, 147)

In Sefer Hamitzvos, Mitzvas Binyan Mikdash (quoted in our Maamar), is the Tzemach Tzedek discussing only Makif Hakarov or also Makif Harachok? (see notes 153, 165)

Why does our Maamar use the term Hisyashvus in its discussion of the Chayus Penimi and Ko’ach Haratzon, if our Maamar is quoting the above Sefer Hamitzvos which does not use this term? (see note 161)

Why does our Maamar seem to imply that the desire to see and the desire to use your mind are the same desire, but they are not the same as the desire to walk or the desire to give with your hands? (see note 162)

Does Ratzon on its own care which way it wants? (see note 163)

Is there a difference in the way Ratzon is Makif the Kochos Penimiyim and the way Ratzon is Makif the Eivarim? (see note 165)

Does our Maamar actually mean that the Tzemach Tzedek explains in Sefer Hamitzvos how something which is Rachok can still be called Makif? (see note 165)

Did the Alter Rebbe ever compare the level of Makif to an apple that has inner flesh which is naturally red instead of white? (see Shulei Hagilyon 215)

How is Avodah on the level of Naaseh similar to the instruction of Chazal not to say “iy efshi” regarding forbidden foods? (see note 188)

Do you have to be serving Hashem on the level of Naaseh in order to merit to fulfill the Mitzvos of Shikcha and Nesius? (see note 192)

Why does our Maamar add the word “Vitzivanu” after quoting the words “Asher Kidishanu B’Mitzvosav” from Likutei Torah? (see note 195)

Why does our Maamar imply that when R’ Yochanan said that R’ Meir’s Drashos included “Talta Mislah,” he meant that there were 3 Misholim? Why does our Maamar seem to say that this portion of a Drasha of R’ Meir is what remained in the days of R’ Yochanan? (see notes 220, 221)

Why does our Maamar conclude specifically with this Posuk describing the era of Moshiach: “Vira’u Kal Basar Yachdav…”? (see note 257)

You can find these and many more ideas from Basi Legani 5726, in this year’s Umedayeik B’Maamar, which provides a unique opportunity, for students and scholars alike, to fulfill the Rebbe’s directive (Likutei Sichos vol. 21 p. 448 – free translation): “In order to understand the true intent of the “Divrei Torah” of our Rebbeim, it is not sufficient to learn them as they have been translated into Loshon Hakodesh (Hebrew) by others, rather we must turn to the words that they said in Yiddish.”