Dear Dr. Lamm, a request from Kenny Hain during a break at the Orthodox Caucus impelled me to produce yet another document on Lubavitch; though this campaign has yielded some results, there are regrettably miles to go before we can sleep. Best regards, David

Dear Dr. Lamm, Enclosed please find a letter about Lubavitch and kashrus which I have just sent to Menachem Genack. If it is taken seriously – and I realize that this is a big “if” – it may have to be shown both to laymen who would have difficulty with Hebrew and to Rabbis who do not read English; consequently, I took the trouble to send him a version in each language, and I enclose both. With the honorable exception of the RCA and, through Jewish Action, the OU itself, most of the world’s Orthodox leadership has been indifferent to a mass movement of false Messianism. It is entirely possible that this indifference will extend to idolatry as well. Luther, who was nobody’s fool, once suggested that missionaries who approach Jews should first argue for the Messiahship of Jesus and only later, when their targets have become accustomed to the first doctrine, emphasize his divinity. I wonder whether we have been similarly desensitized. Time will tell. Best regards – David Berger, Brooklyn College of the City University of New York.

Dear Dr. Lamm: Pearl and I are very grateful for the inscribed copy of The Religious Thought of Hasidism. This is not just a pro forma acknowledgment – I’ve read some of the book and find it both extremely impressive and personally useful. One reservation, however: the book deals with various cosmic mysteries but fails to address a particularly challenging one, namely, how you manage to write all that you do while fulfilling the demanding role of President of a major university. (When Gerson Cohen became Chancellor of JTS, he told me, “I’m out of commission as a scholar.”) Lelokim pitronim. Sincerely, David Berger.

Dear Dr. Lamm, thank you very much for sending this book. The material is particularly instructive for its absence of any reference to the Rebbe’s Messianship despite the fact that the author believes in it be-emunah shelemah. Thus, this is a good example of the approach of the Lubavitch moderates, who genuinely accept the Rebbe’s physical death, believe that he will certainly be the Messiah, and oppose any public indications of this belief. For an explicit affirmation by Kahan of all these positions, see the enclosed, which was written, as best I can tell, a few years after the Rebbe’s death. See especially pp. 13-14 (sections 12-13), 19-21 (section 17). Needless to say, anyone reading the material that you sent me in isolation would say that we have here a major Lubavitch thinker who discusses the redemption without any reference to the Rebbe’s Messianship and can therefore be presumed not to believe in it. Best regards, David