A recent wave has entered the community to change from the traditional way our children learn Alef Beis and Kriah. However, new research has uncovered that this “new” method is really centuries old.
By Rabbi Avrohom Schtroks – Kriah Rebbi and expert on the Mesorah Method
Kriah. The cornerstone of our children’s success in school and Yiddishe life. And that’s why it’s critical we do it right.
Recently, a new wave has entered the community to change from the traditional way our children learn Alef Beis and Kriah, which traces itself back to Har Sinai and implants in children Emunah in Hashem.
Seeing how some children in older grades struggle at reading, several well-meaning educators sought a solution to help these struggling children. In their search, they came across a special method that is taught by a Kriah tutor in Boro Park who offers high promises of helping all children know how to read fluently.
This “Phonetics Method” as it is known, was introduced to our community a number of years back for children with severe reading issues. After using this to teach children with reading difficulties with some success, some tutors came up with the idea to use this method for children who aren’t challenged.
While this method was thought to be a recent innovation by Kriah professionals, below we will demonstrate that it is nothing new. In fact, the method was developed by the Maskilim of old, and it was this method that was rejected by our Rebbeim. Besides, as many experienced and successful Kriah teachers can testify, their claim of success is dubious, and it is redundant and unhelpful.
As we all know, the traditional method (Mesorah) is to teach Kriah has been to say the name of the nekudah, followed by the name of the letter, and then the sound that it makes (e.g., “Komatz-Alef-Ah”). In the “Phonetics Method,” they say the sound of the letter, the sound of the nekudah, and then the sound that it makes (e.g., “B Ah Ba”).
Although it can sometimes look like this method is more effective, the Rebbe explained (Simchas Torah night 5729) that in the long term the Mesorah Method will bring better results than the Phonetics Method, even if the new methods might seem faster here and now. The Rebbe noted that even reading professionals at the time came to realize this. Of course, one must know how to teach and use the Mesorah method properly.
In this discussion, I will not discuss the effectiveness of the method. Instead, I will focus on the history of the method and what our Rebbeim said about it. For Chassidim, the Rebbeim’s words should suffice.
The New Methods
In 5561 (1806), Yehuda Leib Ben-Zev, a maskil and heretic, published a book “Mesilas Halimud,” where a change in teaching Kriah was introduced for the first time. The Maskilic method would be developed over the following century by other Maskilim until it would have the form that it has today.
Ben-Zev’s change was limited to the way of teaching Nekudos, teaching them by their potential sounds as opposed to teaching their names (i.e. Komatz, Patach, etc.). Instead of reciting “Komatz Beis – buh,” they would say, “Beis uh – buh.”
Around 40 years later, the maskil Isidor Busch discarded the reciting of the names of the letters, and instead recommended teaching their phonetic sounds (“Bh uh – buh”). This can be seen in his book “Limudei Hakriah” which is based on the “Mesilas Halimud,” and was reprinted in a second edition in 5615-1855.
In 5657 (1896), Magnus Krinsky, also a maskil and heretic, publishes the book “Reishis Da’as” (picture 6). This new child-friendly book, taught Kriah used the above method with some small additions (such as the silent Alef). This book became extremely popular with 150 editions being printed.
Due to its widespread popularity, the Frierdiker Rebbe addressed the Reishis Da’as by name and said that it is impure and should not be used (Sefer HaSichos 5704 p 156). “We must learn with a child ‘Komatz Alef Oh,’ ‘Patach Beis bah’; not like the Reishis Da’as, which in truth is lacking Da’as and coming from the lightheaded.”
This exact “Phonetics Method” that is being introduced to our community is the very same method preached in the Reishis Da’as centuries ago. This method was introduced by the maskilim starting from the Alter Rebbe’s times, and it was this method that the Rebbeim fought against and would not bend in even the slightest degree (see Admur Tzemach Tzeddek V’Tenuas HaHaskalah).
What Our Rebbeim Said About It
The Rebbeim voiced many times the necessity to stick to the traditional method and not to use any innovations in this area. For the sake of brevity, we will suffice with two quotes from the Rebbe Rashab.
In one letter (#234), the Rebbe Rashab writes, “By teaching the letter and words with holiness, this implants in a child the light of holiness, and one can hope the child will go in the way of Torah and Mitzvos… [but] by learning the letters and words in a method arranged by those who are far from Torah … this ingrains in a child the energy of the method’s innovator and it brings the child to its innovative ways R”L…
“When in the beginning of his learning he gets implanted with a “poison weed” R”L, what can one hope for the child? The child’s father will have to give judgment for this R”L…”
And in another letter (#545), he writes, “The method must be according to the old method without even the slightest change… Any change or addition causes a problem that people cannot imagine. In this method, there are details that people think as unimportant, when in fact ‘great mountains’ depend on them…”
For a full resource of what the Rebbeim said and wrote regarding teaching Kriah, click here.
Understanding the Rebbe’s Directives
The well-meaning educators who are trying to bring this method into our community have tried to justify the change. They claim that the Rebbe agreed to compromise for those who would otherwise learn the letters and Nekudos in the Maskilic method.
Aside from the fact that no source has been found for this in the Rebbe’s writings or Sichos, more importantly, a compromise made to save certain Yiddishe children from an improper method is not a directive to use that method for our pure children.
There is more to be said about this topic, and it will be discussed in a forthcoming publication Bez”H.
It is my fervent hope that this will help educate the public on this important matter and all our children merit a pure education according to the teachings of our Rebbeim.
Special thanks to fellow Kriah Rebbis for their input and to the staff at the Aguch Library for access to the various sources.
Rabbi Avrohom Schtroks is a Kriah teacher with extensive knowledge of the Mesorah Method and years of successful classroom experience. He is available for mentoring and school presentations. He can be reached at [email protected].
The rebbe approved at least two curriculums on Kriah that clearly outline how to teach.
1) lamdaini
2) me’os le’os
Both of these curriculums have the concept of teaching the phonetic sounds of the letters. (Do proper research and you can easily find them)
This article misrepresents the facts.
It reads like someone trying to convey personal understandings rather then present the facts.
The maskilim did not invent sounds it was given by Moshe on Sinai.
The maskilim tried using it to take advantage and cut out the learning of the aleph bais.
Please do proper research and don’t present things that are false!!
See my comment below.
I believe you are bringing support to the fact that the sounds of the letters may (or should) be taught before the nekudos are taught.
This is not the central focus of Rabbi Schtrocks’ article, rather he is criticizing a system where the traditional “komatz alef ah” is substituted by something else.
Eliyahu:
I am the person R Shtrock is referring to. We spoke for a total of over two hours, on two separate occasions. I made it perfectly clear to him that I DO NOT endorse substituting or in any way shortening the traditional “komatz alef ah”. Our conversations were recorded.
Perhaps he would like to explain why he omitted this very important fact.
Are you suggesting we teach Kria twice? First we teach the Meosrah Method and once the child knows how to read we should reteach it with Phonetics?!
The article brings clearly from the Rebbe Rashab that ADDING to the Mesorah is an issue.
No, not twice. Just explain reasons, like the Alte Rebbe says to do. Please see my other comments. Part of Mesorah.
Response- by Dr. Weinbaum – creator of Lamdeini
In 1971 my wife and I had yechidus with the Rebbe. I was involved in teaching in Sunday Hebrew school where there were problems with learning to read Hebrew. The Rebbe told me that It is very important to teach Alef Beis by teaching the names of the letters and vowels first. This is a statistically a more successful way of teaching and also strengthens the emunah of the children who are learning.
It is also important to use words from the Siddur and Chumash to increase the child’s familiarity.
The Rebbe went on to say ‘if at any time you have the opportunity to produce a book to teach Hebrew reading in addition to what I have mentioned you should ensure that there are no pictures of girls and boys on the same page; and there are no pictures of treife animals or names of treife animals included in the text.’
The Rebbe concluded this part of the yechidus by blessing me that I should ‘blaze the trails of Yiddishkeit ‘(those were the exact words in English) with Alef Beis.
10 years later, the opportunity presented itself to make a Hebrew Reading book.
The text of Lamdeni is the text of the original Mavoh Lekriah.
The challenge in teaching at a Sunday school was that many of the parents could not read Hebrew. Therefore they could not practise with their children. The English mnemonic at the top of the page was to act as an aide memoire for the parents so they could help the children.
A Teacher’s Guide was produced to go with the book to explain how to teach using Kametz Alef oh.
When the proof of the book was shown to the Rebbe before we went to print, he commented ‘teshuas chen, teshuas chen, me’or ainayim’.
It was never intended that the book should be used to teach phonetics, Chas vesholom.
” The Rebbe told me that It is very important to teach Alef Beis by teaching the names of the letters and vowels first.”
Exactly. The Rebbe didn’t tell you “don’t ever teach sounds – even after teaching names”. The anti-sound crowd say “never teach sounds”.
Thank you Rabbi Schtroks.
This is a very important and well-researched article.
I would like to however take issue with one point.
Most of the article addresses a non-mesorah method of teaching, i.e. not using the “komatz aleph ah” formula and substituting that by the sounds alone. I think there is no doubt that Rabbi Schtrocks is correct, and the method is precisely what the Rabeim were so against.
However there is an entirely separate discussion, and that is if there is place for the sounds of the letters to be taught before teaching Komatz-Alef-Uh (i.e ever before teaching nekudos, to stress that the sound of “beis” is the sound of the word “brocho” etc.). There is no source anywhere that the Rabeim were against this, and to the contrary, this is a system that is even mentioned in some holy seforim.
Recently, some of the Chashuvei Rabonei Chabad clearly stated their opinion that in fact the sounds of the letters SHOULD be taught. Rabbi Braun wrote about this on his “ask the rov”, Rabbi Schochet of LA wrote a very sharp letter about this, Rabbi Altein of Winnipeg wrote about this, and Rabbi Gourarie of Sydney wrote about this.
I only want to add that several years ago I was asked to meet with the רבנים חשובים from the CH Bais Din.
When we came, only R Shvei OB”M was in.
1) He had absolutely no problem with teaching sounds of letters and nekudos after teaching names.
2) He had no problem whatsoever explaining to a struggling child why Kamatz Bais is Buh, by showing him that the “Buh” is simply a combination of the beginning sound of the letter combined with the sound of the nekudah. In fact R Shvei added a logical proof to be מתיר this explanation:
In longer combinations like גַם there is no longer a Mesorah (no Mesora to say Pasach Gimel Ga Mem Gam), yet good readers naturally pick up how to add the Mem. R Shvei argued that the better reader intuitively understands to add the SOUND of the mem. Therefore, he argued, it is impossible to say that the Rabbeim wanted to prohibit a melamed from explaining to the weaker student, what the better student intuitively understood.
I am not sure what your method of teaching is.
As I wrote in all my comments, there is not source that the sounds of the oisois not be taught.
But there is a clear mesora and many sources that the actual teaching must be through the kometz alef ah method.
I don’t see any issue explaining a student why kamatz alef is ah, but there is an issue making him sound out “s ah sah” etc. instead of “komatz samach sah”.
I don’t know who you are, and the issue isn’t personal ch”v. There is a kolo deloi posik that schools have started teaching first komatz alef ah just for the sake of ritual, and then they go to the “s ah sah” method and focus on that. I hope that kolo delo posik isn’t true, but if it is – that is a clear breach of our holy mesorah, and should be protested.
Eliyahu:
1) You wrote “As I wrote in all my comments, there is not source that the sounds of the oisois not be taught.”
Response: However both the author and his colleague DO have an issue with teaching ANY sounds. Ask them, and if they deny it, I’ll BLN look through my emails and recordings of them.
2) Insofar as what you wrote that there is “a kolo deloi posik that schools have started teaching first komatz alef ah just for the sake of ritual, and then they go to the “s ah sah” method and focus on that”.
Response: I addressed the issue you are concerned about in my very first post on this thread. On April 7, 2022 at 11:11 am I wrote: “I am the person R Shtrock is referring to. We spoke for a total of over two hours, on two separate occasions. I made it perfectly clear to him that I DO NOT endorse substituting or in any way shortening the traditional “komatz alef ah”. Our conversations were recorded.” As to קלא דלא פסיק, please see יבמות כה. that there is no חשד בקלא דלא פסיק מחמת אויבים.
I spoke to the Rav in Crown Heights who is in touch with those using this method there, he says he was assured that komatz alef ah is NOT taught just for the sake of ritual.
3) You also wrote: “I don’t see any issue explaining a student why kamatz alef is ah, but there is an issue making him sound out “s ah sah” etc. instead of “komatz samach sah”.
Response: This didn’t come up in my discussions with the author or his coleague, since they disallow ANY sounds, but now that you bring it up – Any source? My understanding is that this isn’t against Mesorah (did you check the two curriculums Zalman mentions?), but if this in any way is against Mesorah, I will agree with you 100%.
I’d be happy to talk to you directly. You can email me at [email protected].
Thank you Rabbi Schtrocks for this fascinating and informative article.
He did not go into details. But one of the basic basic mesorah of the aleph bais is that letters do not have sounds. There’s no place for phonics in the misora.
Only if a letter has a nekudah underneath can it make a sound.
The Rebeiim referred to it as a neshama the nekuda giving life to a guf the alef bais letter.
I have given many workshops on this subject and if you want more information you can email me.
[email protected]
This article isn’t about if letters have sounds or not, which is a different discussion. This is about whether the method of teaching should be “Komatz Alef Uh” as it was done traditionally, or whether they can TEACH with sounds (and just mention “Komatz Alef Uh” to be yoitzei).
Did you see R Altein’s article in Haoros Ubiyurim from several years back, saying otherwise?
Furthermore, several CHABAD Rabbonim I spoke to are of the opinion that the Rebeiim where not referring to teaching children, but rather to the מציאות הדברים.
As R Zalman noted, at least two curriculums with the BROCHO of the Rebbe DID teach sounds, and although R Shtrucks told me that he found something in the library (which he said he wasn’t allowed to copy) specifically prohibiting the teaching of sounds , he has never produced it nor included it in this article.
Some people brought proof specifically allowing sounds from the כתבים of the Maharyatz, where he says that he learned Kria by a Melamed who explained the shape of an Aleph as being similar to a דלי, as brought in the Likutim of the Meor Eynayim of Chernobel. Although at first glance this seems דומה to a הורדה בקדושת האותיות and also is definitely not “true” – an Aleph isn’t a דלי, the M”E explains the need to do so:
צריך המלמד ליתן לו סימנים לפי שכלו הקטן ולהלביש לו הדבר כפי שכלו …. להלביש לו בשכלו בשכל קטן מאוד … שכך היא אצלו צמצום אלקותו ית”ש הגדול שמצומצם באותו הזמן אצל התינוק
Are you Suggesting we should be teaching something not true to the children?!
See my comment below.
The SIcha from the Rebbe RaYatz and from the Meor EnaYim are speaking about the teaching the SHAPES of the letters and NOT referring to their sounds as you are suggesting.
All משלים are meant לקרב אל השכל. The נמשל is only דומה למשל. Please see the Meor Eynayim inside. Why are משלים about shapes OK if they aren’t true, and sounds not a good משל?
Thank You Rabbi Schtroks for the wonderful article and for bringing the important issue to people’s attention.
Thank you Eliyahu for referring to the “Ask the Rav.” I checked it up and don’t see how Rabbi Schtroks is writing differently than Rabbi Braun.
What he is saying is that even though one may say one can teach the sounds of the letters as Rabbi Braun says on the “Ask the Rav,” that won’t apply to teaching the “Phonetics Method” which Rabbi Braun doesn’t discuss at all.
Zalman, if there is something in the Rebbe’s writing regarding teaching sounds, please be mezakeh the public and share it with us!
R’ Mendel:
As mentioned earlier, I’m the one R Schtroks is unhappy about.
1) You write that R Schtroks is referring to something different than what R Braun is referring to, where the former is writing about some “Phonetics Method”, and R Braun is writing about teaching sounds. Could you please explain the difference? If you mean that the “Phonetics Method” omits or compromises on kamatz aleph ah, I’m not sure he he took the time and effort to write this article. I most definitely DO NOT endorse doing so.
As mentioned in the article, the maskilim first did away with teaching the names of the nekudos and then did away with the names of the Aleph Beis letters.
The Rebbeim cried out about this and emphasized the importance of beginning with these two heilige steps. Every child must learn the names of the אותיות and the names of the נקודות.
We then begin to teach “Kamatz Aleph – Uh.” As Rabbi Braun explained, this presumes the child understands that each אות has a unique sound and each נקודה has a unique sound. The “mesorah method” of Kamatz Aleph – Uh” requires that the child knows the two sounds so he can blend them to read.
The “method” of reading “DOWN” mentioned in the article – first the sound of the letter followed by the sound of the nekuda, can NOT be called “poison” or “apikorsus” – it is how every word in לשון הקודש is read, is it not?!
We first say the sound of the letter and then the sound of the nekuda.
Is the author proposing we all return to Kamatz Aleph Uh when we read from the siddur or chumash?
Lubavitch has seen a full generation of children struggle with kriah due to countless morahs and rebbeim mistakenly shielding children from the Emes- teaching them the sounds of the אותיות and נקודות when they are בן חמש למקרא .
No, it is not the way we read in Loshon HaKodesh. This concept of splitting up the sound of syllables comes from unholy sources.
I think the author was specifically saying not to add this DOWN method you mentioned (which is just another term for “phonetics”) and allow it to happen in the way children learned it for thousands of years.
Do you really think that the Kria issues disappear with the Phonetics method?!
This comment refers to issues R Mendel raises (the last one was meant for “dee bee”)
R Mendel writes: ” This concept of splitting up the sound of syllables comes from unholy sources.”
My comment: “Comes from”? The sensationalist tone of this article makes it seem so, but the proof isn’t there. As Zalman, Eliyahu, Dee bee and others explained “the unholy sources” wanted to be עוקר קדושת האותיות והנקודות – that’s something very different.
Personally, I actually took in קודם כל from the Gemara in עירובין נד:
חייב להראות לו פנים, ופרש”י “לתת טעם בכל אשר יוכל ואל תאמר הבן אתה הטעם מעצמך … צריך אתה לסדר ולשום לפניהם טעם המיישב תלמודם
אדמוה”ז held that simple reasons are integral to learning, see פ”ב ה”א and פ”ד הי”ח.
Thank You!
I would add:
Teaching sounds is not some some of magic panacea. Some of the additional prerequisites are סייעתא דשמיא and תפילה for סייעתא דשמיא. Right before Krias Shema – every single day – we actually have a brocho for that.
Teaching sounds is a valuable TOOL, not a goal in of itself. However, when PROPERLY applied it can be the basis for helping students reach a level of accuracy that they usually find out of reach. It also allows for a clear system of diagnosis and rectification of problems students encounter when reading.
If we assume, like many here have argued, that there is absolutely nothing from the Rabbeim against teaching sounds, I think the next question a Melamed יר”ש would ask himself is: Am I ממלא my תפקיד?
The Maharyatz writes:
(ח”ז ע’ קמד) “העבודה שבחכמת הדקדוק, לבטא אותיות התפלה בביטוי ברור ומדויק, הוא תלוי’ ביראת שמים וגם מביאה יראת שמים
When I spoke to both R Schtrocks and to his colleague who also wrote an article against me, I reiterated that the real problem is that לבטא אותיות התפילה בביטוי ברור ומדויק is almost like a מת מצוה due to היסח הדעת. Instead of actually seeing that students Daven without mistakes, “wishful thinking” reigns. The assumption is that all that’s missing is רגילות/practice – MISTAKES are often ignored and/or not systematically rectified. This is wrong, since CHAZAL say that mistakes don’t get better on their own, instead שבשתא כיון דעל על. This is also the Psak of אדמוה”ז in פ”א סי”א of הל’ ת”ת.
Additionally, the implication of אדמוה”ז in פ”א ה”ו is that students need to master reading on a level which would make it possible for them to LEARN INDEPENDENTLY. This means reading NEW TEXT, as opposed to Siddur, which is to a large extant memorized. Is anybody checking?
Boys over בר מצוה need to do שנים מקרא ואחד תרגום as noted in ס’ רפ”ה. Can they?
I think that the real question that should be posed to the רבנים חשובים is: 1) Choshen Mishpat ס’ ש”ו talks about the responsibilities of Melamdim, מצד חושן משפט. If I have a set of tools which can help me reach my Tafkid, am I allowed to refrain from using them even if that has caused me in the past from fulfilling my responsibilities?
1. The issue with the maskilim is that they were omitting teaching the holy names of the osios and nekudos and omitting teaching with kamatz alef uh. The issue is not that they were teaching sounds. This is clear when reading Sichos and letters from the Rabbeim that spell out exactly what they were fighting against.
2. When one teaches bih+uh=buh IN ADDITION to teaching the names and kamatz alef uh, one is merely explaining that which kids with a good ear “get” intuitively. Namely, that kamatz beis is buh because the beis starts with “bih” and the kamatz makes it rhyme with “uh”.
Why is it that a bright kid who already learned several nekudos, if you tried telling him “shuruk chof guh”, he wouldn’t ‘buy it’? Because he intuitively got the pattern that a chof will always make a “chi” sound and a nekuda will always make it rhyme with its name. There is no sin in explaining this simple logic to kids in order to make sure every child gets it.
1 – The Letters from the Rebbe Rashab brought in the article spell out quite clearly that the issue is not only with OMITTING stages but also with ADDING other new methods.
“The method must be according to the old method without even the slightest change… Any change or addition causes a problem that people cannot imagine.”
“By learning the letters and words in a method arranged by those who are far from Torah … this ingrains in a child the energy of the method’s innovator and it brings the child to its innovative ways R”L.”
2 – What you call an “explanation” is in fact a method that was developed by Maskilim as the writer explained in the article. It is this “explanation” that causes spiritual damage.
When one reads both of the above mentioned letters in full, rather than pulling paragraphs out of context (as well as looks up related letters noted in the footnote) it is clear what the issues were with the maskilim’s methods of teaching and how they were uprooting the kedusha from children.
Just looked up letter 2 brought in the article, it’s basically the whole letter. I don’t see any different understanding that can be derived from it.
Will look at letter 1 soon (it’s quite long).
This is for R Mendel:
You write: “the issue is not only with OMITTING stages but also with ADDING other new methods”.
Rebuttal: Nothing new here, actually part of מסורת התורה – dedicated melamdim surely learn הל’ מלמדים before embarking on a teaching career and any CHABAD melamid should surely aspire to learn the הל’ ת”ת של אדמוה”ז. Every melamid would surely see that their obligation is to explain לפי דרגת התלמיד. Many have pointed out that sounds are just a way of explaining and bringing things down to the level of EVERY student.
Are you saying that the Rebeyim, who were גאונים מפורסמים בכל מכמני התורה”ק somehow C”V “forgot” to mention that the general rule of explaining doesn’t apply to Kria?
The R Schtrocks also wrote an article in הערות וביאורים on this subject. He quotes some Maskil complaining that there is no ספר מיוחד to teach Kria and that he עפרא לפומי’ is going to “fix” the problem. It struck me why the author quotes the Maskil without noting that we have plenty of הוראות כלליות about how to teach – all a CHABAD Chossid should do is learn Hichos T”T from אדמוה”ז PLUS all the things the אדמורים wrote pertaining to the subject – and not be מטיל מום בקדשים to C”V think they said or wrote things that can be understood to be contradicting the Alte Rebbe’s S”A and “forgot” to mention it..
R Mendel wrote:
“By learning the letters and words in a method arranged by those who are far from Torah … this ingrains in a child the energy of the method’s innovator and it brings the child to its innovative ways R”L.”
Agreed 100%.
And by writing sensationalist articles which confuse החיוב לתת טעם בכל אשר יוכל with “methods arranged by those who are far from Torah”, we run the very real risk of חומרא המביאה לידי קולא.
Please see :
כ’ הש”ך בקיצור הנהגות הוראות איסור והיתר הנדפס בסוף ס’ רמ”ב “כשם שאסור להתיר את האסור כך אסור לאסור את המותר” ואע”פ שלפי הנראה לא יבוא מזה צד קולא, שאפשר שיתגלגל ויבא קולא עד אחר מאה דברים”,
עיני ראו ולא זר the repercussions:
The Bachur who ran away from home and went to San Fransisco with a friend. He came back because his friend committed suicide. He agreed to come for an evaluation. His reading was ATROCIOUS. He commented – now I know whom to blame, but at that point couldn’t care less R”L.
… And some good news:
The father who chased after me one Yom Kipper morning to tell me that his son, who had learned by me several years prior, was about to publish his first Sefer on יו”ד ח”ב. No, it doesn’t happen every day, but it sure helps weather the בזיונות of being called a Maskil.
Leah:
Beautifully put!
As I noted earlier in my comment to Eliyahu, R Shvei OB”M pretty much made the same argument, when I met with him.
He said:
In longer combinations like גַם there is no longer a Mesorah (no Mesora to say Pasach Gimel Ga Mem Gam), yet good readers naturally pick up how to add the Mem. R Shvei argued that the better reader intuitively understands to add the SOUND of the mem. Therefore, he argued, it is impossible to say that the Rabbeim wanted to prohibit a melamed from explaining to the weaker student, what the better student intuitively understood.
A big Yashar Koach goes to Rabbi Schtroks!
Very well researched and written article. I always knew there was something off with this method, I just couldn’t put my finger on it.
Hashem should Bentch you should go Mechayil El Choyil!
Thank you Rabbi Schtroks.
I was always wondering what the Rabbeim were talking about the changes Maskilim were implementing. It was always a blur to me.
It seems pretty clear that Rabbeim didn’t want any changes to be made to chinuch at all. So it doesn’t really matter what the nature of that change is.
That is a pretty big statement, being that many changes have been made in chinuch over the years. For example, the use of blackboards in a cheder classroom was first done by the maskilim. Yet I don’t believe this is a change the Rabbeim were fighting against. There is no need to guess which changes the Rabbeim were referring to. Read through the various Igros.
Blackboards in a classroom is not changing a holy mesorah.
I don’t think anyone is saying that because maskilim wore glasses, we should not wear glasses. The point is that the learning itself must remain the same.
Boruch:
Yes, the learning should remain the same. Good Melamdim always understood the necessity to explain, according to the level of the student, especially CHABAD melamdim. That most definitely changes according to the students’ ability.
An example בעניני דיומא (Hilchos Pesach): A well known Halacha is that מצות מצוה need to be made using מים שלנו – water which stayed in a vessel overnight. The Gemara in Pesachim מב. mentions a story: Rav Masnah, taught the people of פפוניא this Halacha. The town of פפוניא had lots of עמי הארצים and they misunderstood Rav Masnah and thought that he was telling them to use Mayim שלנו – “our” water. So they all brought their jugs to him, he should fill them with his water. The שפת אמת על הש”ס explains that this story is brought down to teach us to EXPLAIN according to the listeners’ understanding.
The generations also get weaker, both in הבנה and in זכרון, as noted in עירובין נג.
אמר ר’ יוחנן לבן של ראשונים כפתחו של אולם ושל אחרונים כפתחו של היכל ואנו כמלא נקב מחט סידקית
אמר רבא ואנן כי אצבעתא בקירא לסברא אמר רב אשי אנן כי אצבעתא בבירא לשכחה
פרש”י כאצבע בקירא. בשעוה קשה שאין האצבע יכול ליכנס בתוכה אלא מדבק מעט: כאצבע בבירה לשכחה. כשם שהאצבע נוח ליכנס בפי הבור כך אנו מהירין לשכוח:
please keep the conversation going, it is important sheyisboreru vyislabnu.
thank you rabbi shtrocks! thank you commenters!
Levi, perhaps you can encourage the “anti-sounds” crowd to right a substantive rebuttal to carefully sourced articles written on the subject which argue that Sounds ARE Al Pi Mesorah?
An example of such an article would be that R’ Braun wrote on his website, which is almost 1000 words long.
It seems strange to me that nobody has attempted a point-by-point rebuttal so far.
Perhaps people follow a different Rav, but if so, does that mean that even a well sourced competing Rav becomes בטל ומבוטל כעפרא דארעא, not even deserving a serious rebuttal?
By the famous Kliva Get, the competing camps published several Seforim. Have we gotten to point that we reach a Psak by quoting Maskilim instead of finding sources within the תורה”ק.
To the author: You told me you’d send clear sources from the אדמורים stating SOUNDS ARE אסור. Please do so!
Again, the issue isn’t the teaching of sounds. R’ Braun’s arguments are definitely logical (plus he is a respected Rav and his opinion needs to be treated with respect).
The question is, is the קלא דלא פסיק that schools are introducing a new method of teaching that doesn’t focus on קמץ א אָ – true or not? If it is true, than the bulk of Rabbi Schtrocks article has nothing to do with R’ Braun’s article (it seems that at first there was a mistaken line alluding to the issue R’ Braun wrote about, but it seems to have been edited out).
I”m just re-posting my comment from elsewhere on this thread:
The Tutor This Article Refers To says:
April 10, 2022 at 3:44 pm
Your comment is awaiting moderation.
Eliyahu:
1) You wrote “As I wrote in all my comments, there is not source that the sounds of the oisois not be taught.”
Response: However both the author and his colleague DO have an issue with teaching ANY sounds. Ask them, and if they deny it, I’ll BLN look through my emails and recordings of them.
2) Insofar as what you wrote that there is “a kolo deloi posik that schools have started teaching first komatz alef ah just for the sake of ritual, and then they go to the “s ah sah” method and focus on that”.
Response: I addressed the issue you are concerned about in my very first post on this thread. On April 7, 2022 at 11:11 am I wrote: “I am the person R Shtrock is referring to. We spoke for a total of over two hours, on two separate occasions. I made it perfectly clear to him that I DO NOT endorse substituting or in any way shortening the traditional “komatz alef ah”. Our conversations were recorded.” As to קלא דלא פסיק, please see יבמות כה. that there is no חשד בקלא דלא פסיק מחמת אויבים.
I spoke to the Rav in Crown Heights who is in touch with those using this method there, he says he was assured that komatz alef ah is NOT taught just for the sake of ritual.
3) You also wrote: “I don’t see any issue explaining a student why kamatz alef is ah, but there is an issue making him sound out “s ah sah” etc. instead of “komatz samach sah”.
Response: This didn’t come up in my discussions with the author or his coleague, since they disallow ANY sounds, but now that you bring it up – Any source? My understanding is that this isn’t against Mesorah (did you check the two curriculums Zalman mentions?), but if this in any way is against Mesorah, I will agree with you 100%.
I’d be happy to talk to you directly. You can email me at [email protected].
Wow Rabbi Schtroks! This is a real master piece!
I had my child in Rabbi Schtroks’s class, it was truly amazing to see how he took my child from his struggles to be a Mentch and a real beautiful reader.
So happy to see that you’ll be sharing your talents with others, many will surely benefit.
Thank you Rabbi Shtroks for this priceless and eye opening article. It needs to be disseminated em masse. Boruch Hashem some of our essential mosdos chinch have NOT abandoned the mesorah, and we pray that the few that have deviated should return.
Rabbi Schtroks is a A+ fantastic Mechanech.
We are very lucky to have our son in his class.
From the beginning of the year he knew exactly where my son was holding in Kria and he reassured us that he wiil IY”h read well (Alef Beis and Kria learning were a challenge for my son throughout kindergarten).
with a few months still left to Yeshiva, My son is already reading full paragraphs from Tehillim! He is excited to read homework every day. he is so proud to show that he can also read!
Rabbi Schtroks gets an Amazing Thank You and Yashar Koach for making this a reality.
Thank you Rabbi Schtroks for your very informative, well researched article! I hope all our schools take this to heart.
We daven that with Hashem’s help we will be zoche that all our children will learn kriah according to the pure mesorah without any phonetics- an invention of the maskilim.
I hope and daven that all our children will be given this opportunity.
I was shocked and so disappointed when I heard this method is being used in some of our schools. I hope they will change their curriculum back to the good old way.
There were some reasons that were given but nothing documented. We need to follow what the Rabbeim taught us that was clearly printed. Sometimes individuals may have been given directives pertinent to them and their situation. Please lets not apply it to all our children. Have rachmonis and allow our children to learn the pure way.
Why give “medicine” ( kriah with phonetics) to healthy children who can learn without and stay healthy in a ruchnius sense as the Frierdiker Rebbe says.
Thank you to those schools holding on strong and may all our yeshivas join!!
May we have Moshiach now!
Thank you Rabbi Schtroks for this clear informative article.
I taught kriah for 10 years b”h and have reached every single child, teaching them to read with accurand fluency, completely in the way of our mesorah!
Yes it did mean I needed to go back and learn the rules in utmost detail. When I had the clarity, I was able to give that over to my students.
We need to be in tune with every student to reach them. It takes immense effort and focus.
The mesorah is not what needs to change.
Giving our melamdim and morahs the clarity, the tools needed and the ability to reach each of their students, that is what will bring about the success in every child learning how to read.
Zalman:
מאות לאות does not say where and when they use sounds. Mrs. Drulman, one of the authors said its not meant for preschool. Rather only at a later stage in first grade.
Here’s her # and this is what she wrote to one of our senior mechanchim.
+972 54-577-0176
בlמובן ופשוט ואין ספק, שהשלב הראשון הוא – הכרת האותיות והתנועות, כפי שהם מופיעים בסידור, ולומדים את ה א-ב והתנועות לפי המסורת.
אולם, כדי להקל על קליטת צירוף התנועות לאות, אנחנו מלמדים את צליל האות, שאז קל לתפוס את הקריאה.
ג. ברור שהחוברות אינן מתאימות לילדי ה’חדר’ בגיל 3-4, שאז אין מקום ללמד את צליל האות.
החוברות מתאימות לגיל כתה א’, וברור שמשננים את האותיות והתנועות וצירופן כפי שזה מופיע בסידור, כחלק בלתי נפרד מלימוד הקריאה.
באיחולי הצלחה בעבה”ק,
ס. דרוקמן
Regarding Lamdeini,
I was told by a friend that the author told him that at yechidus the Rebbe told him to follow mesora 100% with no changes.
This can be verified
Levi:
I don’t think your quote from Mrs. Druckman is helping the anti-sounds crowd AT ALL. In fact, you’re just helping the pro-sounds group.
Mrs Druckman taught sounds to facilitate חיבור and she did so for EVERYONE. The anti-sounds group doesn’t allow any sounds at all, except as a big בדיעבד! In fact, R Schtrock’s colleague told me that he believes that the Raishus Daas and his ilk were מחדש specifically using sounds for חיבור. Many strongly disagree.
By you consistently turning the issue into sounds or no sounds, you are not being intellectually honest. See my comments above.
C”V that I should intentionally be intellectually dishonest. I was addressing sounds, since that is what the author was concerned about during our conversations.
A longer response to your concerns along with my email address so you could contact me directly, are in two of my other comments from today.
Just wanted to add that the author’s problem with teaching ANY sounds is also clear in this article.
Although he first argues against bi-ah-bah, he goes on to say that Ben-Zev didn’t teach nekudah names, Busch left out letter names and Krinsky “taught Kriah used the above method with some small additions (such as the silent Alef”.
Clearly not just about child saying bi-ah=bah. Agreed?
Please see the curriculum of lamdaini.
Clearly outlines the teaching of sounds.
Please speak with rabbi wianboum who wrote the curriculum and received the rebbes Brocha.
Mrs druk man clearly writes that teaching sounds is a must have and a sort before combining the sounds.
The full curriculum is readily available online for all to see.
With step by step instructions.
With clear instructions of teaching sounds!!
Don’t take my word go look for yourself.
I found the full curriculum online https://mbakodesh.org.il/project_cat/%D7%90%D7%95%D7%AA%D7%99%D7%95%D7%AA-%D7%9E%D7%90%D7%99%D7%A8%D7%95%D7%AA/
With the rebbes holy signature.
I don’t see the Rebbe’s signature or approval anywhere in that link.
Point is sounds are part of the learning process. I never said at what exact point to use sounds.
I have spoken with the authors of both curriculums, both have told me very clearly
“Yes sounds are part of the aleph bais learning process”
The point was that sounds are NOT from the maskilim as we see sounds being thought in a curriculum approved by the rebbe!!
Not sure what the argument here is.
Open the curriculums and see for yourself.
Teaching sounds is kosher. Teaching sounds is part of the holy aleph bais.
Proof is it’s in two curriculums approved by the rebbe!!
I spoke with Rabbi wainboum who created the lamdaini curriculum.
He followed mesorah 100% as the rebbe told him.
The rebbe also was very happy when he gave the rebbe a copy of the curriculum.
He HAS sounds as part of the curriculum.
He teaches sounds and that’s mesorah!!
What else needs to be said.
Mrs drukmans curriculums teach sounds!!
Lamdaini teaches sounds!!
Sounds are clearly not haskala or come from maskilim!!
Makes no difference for what age or stage the child is or from where.
If it is haskala it is Treif.
Obviously sounds are Kosher.
both curriculums have the rebbes Brocha!!
You think the rebbe would give a brocho to teach haskala or allow maskilim to have influence on our holy children.
Those curriculums have been around for over 40 years.
They are part of our mesorah.
To “Tutor from Boro Park”.
I’m a little confused here, Rabbi Schtroks in the article brings out very well how this “Phonics Method” is created by the Maskilim and the Rabbeim called it Treif and one should never be using these methods.
You come and say to use both – “Mesorah” and “Phonics”, you justify yourself by first renaming the method from “Phonics” to “explanation” and with that you quote the Alter Rebbe saying one has to teach the reason behind everything one teaches.
With this you claim you have a source that one must teach sounds.
However I don’t understand where the Alter Rebbe says one should be teaching sounds?! its just your interpretation of the Halocho!
Also (as Mendel G. brought earlier) how does renaming a method to “Explanation” change the status of the method?!
Please see comments from Zalman, Eliyahu, Dee Bee, Leah and others who explain how this article is actually the author’s misguided attempt at turning the teaching of sounds – which is intuitive to most – into some newfangled “invention”.
In fact, several comments meant to dissuade the usage of sounds actually do the opposite and prove that the Rebbe endorsed their usage AS LONG AS NAMES ARE TAUGHT FIRST. Please see my comments on Dr. Weinbaum and Levi Demrof.
You wrote that I changed “phonics” into “explanations”. Actually it’s the other way around. Explanations have always been something we were מקבל מהר סיני and CHAZAL deduce this from the Pasuk אלה המשפטים אשר תשים, we couldn’t care less what derogatory name someone attaches it, or if he decides to print an article with pictures of Maskilim so as to “turn off” יראי השם.
You seem to imply that I claim one must teach sounds to every single student. Actually, I was not saying that.
The maskilim did it invent any methods with sounds.
They simply tried using only sounds and dropping the aleph bais and nekudos altogether.
Please see all the Sichos and letters from the rebbe.
Also in the Sefer raishis daas that the author quotes here at the end of the book they actually bring the aleph bais for teaching the student aleph bais.
Does this mean we can no longer teach our kids aleph bais because a maskil mentioned it in his book?
Rabbi Braun on his site goes over this idea from raishis daas and completely disagrees with this author. See for yourself.
No need to keep looking to other ppl to help you understand.
Open the book and the Rov and you can clearly see.
Quoting the last sentence in the response from “The Tutor This Article Refers To” in Naftoli’s comment:
“The Tutor This Article Refers To” writes “You seem to imply that I claim one must teach sounds to every single student. Actually, I was not saying that.”
So, you’re saying that your method is not for all children (implying, the method is for the struggling children only), comes out that there is no argument, as the article only takes issue with the fact the method is used for all children. which all agree is not ok.