“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.

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?

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.

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 kriafiles2share@gmail.com.

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 kriafiles2share@gmail.com.

I don’t see the Rebbe’s signature or approval anywhere in that link.

By you consistently turning the issue into sounds or no sounds, you are not being intellectually honest. See my comments above.

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 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.

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.

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.

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!!

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.

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.

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.

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?!

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.

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?

” 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”.

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.

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!

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:

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.

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.

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.

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..

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.

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?