Rabinowitz printed three photographs to help prove his point (two where the subject's head is uncovered and one where one of the previous photos has mysteriously grown a kippah). He also spoke about - though unfortunately did not provide the picture - that a common photograph of the Lubavitcher Rebbe that originally had him without a kippah.
I find it interesting that we try to re-write history to remove any of that evil "C" word (change). I noticed two months ago a similar revising of history.
This is the Ben Ish Chai, R'Yosef Chaim Baghdadi (1832-1909):
This is the only picture of him that ever existed. As the story goes he refused to have his picture taken, until the rich supporter of his Yeshiva requested one, and he relented. If you notice there is a black stripe on the right side - yes, he wore Tefillin all day long.
This is the cover of Peninei HaBen Ish Chai published by Feldheim.
This is nowhere near the "scandal" that Rabinowitz speaks about, but peyot are not even Halachikly mandated which is why is seems so strange to me that, of all things, it would be added.
3 comments:
I guess it's all in the eye of the beholder, because before I even saw the second picture, I perceived a peyah on his left side. Certainly, the second picture renders it more prominent, but nevertheless I don't necessarily think they consciously manufactured something, or intended to create a falsehood.
I can see how one could see that but in the new picture it seems to me that the new Peyah is coming out of his beard such an odd angle that it is not part of the new rendering.
1st of all I heard personally from a Mekubal in Jerusalem (since passed away) that the Ben Ish Hhai had very thick peyoth & almost the length of his beard.
2ndly Peyoth are Halakhikly required by Torah law.
Post a Comment