Talk:Skver (Hasidic dynasty)

Odd customs

The following section is taken out of the article and placed here for further clarification. IZAK 11:44, 17 February 2006 (UTC):

"The Skverer sect is uniqe in its strong stress on keeping all of their traditions with no modification. This philosophy was started by the previous Rebbe who is the founder of the current Skverer movement. Although every Hasidic sect has its own unique customs, none come close to Skver both in the quantity of unique customs and in the degree of seriousness about them. As a result, hundreds of old jewish traditions and customs, some even ancient, are found today only in Skver. A few examples are: the chusen muhl (a dance by the bride and groom the night prior to the wedding of any mamber of Rabbi's family) and it is said that it's a very holy time, placing a baby in a drawer (placed on stand to make it look like a crib of course) the first month after birth and the renunciation of the Breslov sect and thier books."

Izak, What don't you understand?Ortho 16:17, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

• Hi Ortho: What does this mean in normal English?:
  • "a dance by the bride and groom" (how are they dancing, together, apart, with others, what kind of "dance" is this???) "the night prior to the wedding of any mamber of Rabbi's family" (which "Rabbi"? any rabbi?) "and it is said that it's a very holy time", (what is the "holy time"??? the dancing or the placing of a baby in a drawer or the Rabbi's family?) "placing a baby in a drawer (placed on stand to make it look like a crib of course)" (what is the source for theis weird activity??? is it normal behavior -- especially for people who want to criticize Breslov?) "the first month after birth and the renunciation of the Breslov sect and thier books." (does the "renunciation" of Breslov take place after the baby is born??? Why are they "renunciating" Breslov? Is there any printed eye-witness report of such "renunciations"??? -- Wikipedia is not the place to publish Bubba meises and meshugasen !!!) IZAK 04:05, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

How is this rivision?: The Skverer sect is unique in its strong stress on keeping all of their traditions with no modification. This philosophy was started by the previous Rebbe who is the founder of the current Skverer movement. Although every Hasidic sect has its own unique customs, none come close to Skver both in the quantity of unique customs and in the degree of seriousness about them. As a result, hundreds of old jewish traditions and customs, some even ancient, are found today only in Skver. Just a few examples are:

1) The chusen muhl; an old custom where the bride and groom dance the the night prior to the wedding, holding on together to a gartel or a tablecloth, similar to the mitzva tanz that is common in all Hasidic sects at the wedding night. Historically the chusen muhl was strongly criticized by many Rebbes as the bride and groom should not meet, much more so not dance, prior to being married. Today it is practiced only in Skver when members of the Rebbe's family get married. Skverer Hasidim consider the chusen muhl a very holy ceremony.

2) The odd custom practiced by all Skverer hasidim of using a drawer (placed on the floor or on a stand to make it look like a crib) in place of a crib the first month after a baby's birth.

The reason for this custom (which is only practiced in Skver) is because until thirty days a baby is not considered to be certain to survive (chezkas kiyum) according to halachah. this is the reason a pidyon haben is made after thirty daysItzik18 21:53, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

3) Making the Upsherin (first haircut of a boy) at age two rather than age three as it is doen by all other groups. Ortho 15:38, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

• Hi Ortho: Thanks for the effort, but do you think that this should go into an encyclopedia? You have provided more details but can you cite sources to satisfy Wikipedia:Citing sources? The English still needs improvement. Good effort though. IZAK 02:09, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
  • Hi IZAK. Should it go into an encyclopedia? If there's anything to say about a hasidic sect in an encyclopedia I think these interesting customs are the first to be mentioned. Isn't this what people - both of the general public and special-interested - would be most interested in?Morever, the diferences among sects is what really defines a sect. Sources: I'm sure there are sources in print somewhere but I'm not going two sit down in a Hebrew library for hours on this. You might technically be right that sources are required in Wikipedia but for that matter we might as well revert almost everything on Wikipedia about hasidic issues and most of Wikipedia in general- unless I just don't notice the sources for some reason. Where are the sources for the rest of this article for example? Ortho 02:52, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

Stating the obvious vs. recounting the weird

Ortho: When obvious facts are stated, known to many people to be true, and which can be easily verified, then there is no need to get pedantic and cite sources (although it's advisable to have some if called upon). This is what is said on Wikipedia:Citing sources:

1. When you add content: "If you add any information to an article, particularly if it's contentious or likely to be challenged, you should supply a source."
2. When there is a factual dispute then: "Disputed edits can be removed immediately, removed and placed on the talk page for discussion, or where the edit is harmless but you dispute it and feel a citation is appropriate, you can place {{citation needed}} after the relevant passage."
3. When there is no factual dispute: "Think ahead: Try to imagine whether people might doubt what you wrote or need more information. Supporting what is written in Wikipedia by referring to a clear and reliable source will add stability to your contribution."

So obviously we must all use our common sense. The truth of the facts in the "history" and "lineage" sections does not need extra citation. Most of the "philosophy and lifetsyle" is also pretty straightforward. BUT, if for so-called "Customs and traditions" you are going to mention weirdo things like putting babies in drawers and brides and grooms dancing with each other the night before they get married or that Breslov books are "burned on sight", which all sounds very bizzare and outside of the normal of Hasidic life, it's best to come up with some reliable source to note why such facts are notable and deserve to be in this, or any, encyclopedia. IZAK 03:49, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

• The fact that its weirdo and bizarre is every reason it belongs in an article discussing the nature of a specific sect. (Not that I want to mock Skver. I think its a beautiful community its just that leaving out these facts takes away a lot from knowing the sect) Regarding being easily verified these are absolutely easily verified there are thousands of Skverer hasidim, ask anyone of them. I agree with you that it would be better to site sources but as I wrote I don't have them handy. Ortho 04:15, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
  • Ortho: Ok, so let's wait till we can get someone, anyone, to help us out here. Honestly, I for one am not going to look up such nariskeiten, but are you sure you are interested in NPOV or is there a hidden desire to smear these people in some way, somewhere? I dunno, it's a little puzzling, don't you think? Like mentioning why people pick their noses or how much time they spend in the bathroom, it's just not encyclopedic according to any normal judgment... IZAK 04:23, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

I don't see it as analogous to your two examples but those examples also absolutely belong in an encyclopedia if there are any real unobvious facts to mention about them. The same would be if a group of thousands of people would systematically and officially pick their noses or use the bathroom a certain way and you are writing an article about that group in an encyclopedia these facts would be appropriate to mention. But again the examples given above about Skver are nothing similar to this. As for my motive the whole truth is that my only motive is to share interesting facts to people who are looking up Skver. I never thought I was smearing them with these facts and I surely hope it is not taken that way. I am sure this is also the motive of those who have added imoptant edits to the paragraph.Ortho 05:20, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

This have no sent..Bresolver 21:59, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

Izak and Ortho, It's certainly true that Skver does have unique customs. The Choson Muhl can be witnessed by anyone (or at least anyone who appears to be Jewish) by attending the main shul in Skver the night before a wedding in the Rebbe's family. Likewise, the custom of using a drawer for the baby is quite widespread, and is common knowledge to anyone familiar with Skverer chasidim.

Having said that, I still don't think these details merit mention in this article. First, if I understand correctly the guideline on no original research, which means previously unpublished, this probably doesn't qualify for entry. Additionally, I don't think these are details that reflect what Skver is. Although strictly speaking they are true (and to other Hasidim, these customs, along with wearing shtievel, saying keitz meshichei, and wearing choker-style talis katan, might be most noteworth) they're mere idiosyncracies of the community. Sort of like an article on Catholics that only includes the fact that priests have white collars, etc.

I did the best I could with the history and the lifestyle, but perhaps it can be expanded upon. Skver certainly has a lot of history going back 200 years. Maybe someone can include a list of famous people who've visited Skver. I can think of Al Gore, Hillary Clinton, George Pataki (many times), etc. Also a Skverer Chasid who's a movie star: Steven Hill (first season of Mission Impossible (he quit when he became frum, they were filming on Shabbos), DA on Law and Order, TV commercials for TD Waterhouse).

What would also be interesting to see are some sources on the fierce opposition to Breslov. I have yet to see scholarly works on that subject, and it's an important feature of Skver.

--Kotzker 08:31, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

Kotzker; on the issue of Breslov there is not much scholarly works on this matter it is mostly Torah Shel Baal Peh It is not only that Skverrer Chassidm are opposing them it is all Chassidishe Kreizen from Ukraine. I dont think it belongs here, rather on the Breslov page.--Chusid 15:23, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

Can somebody please explain the boots. I have, it's listed in the article on chossidus and chossidc yiddishkeit. I know it's true, considering Lipa Shmeltczer, a Skver chossid weres them. That, plus whats the difference between the skverer pronunciation and the regular chossidic pronunciation????--Shaul avrom 19:00, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

Skver is adamently opposed to Breslov Sefers. You'll excuse my lack of remembering right now, but there is a Breslover sefer called Something HaTzadik, which records various endorsements of Breslov by famous rabbbis. The section about Yoel Teitelbaum has a conversation between him and the SKverer rebbe on this subject. 82.81.21.102 18:30, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

I put Steven Hill into the article. I think that a better place for "famous people who've visited Skver" would be in the article on "New Square, New York". Lipa Schmeltzer wears different costumes all the time. -- -- -- 02:46, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

Update: Steven Hill was removed from the article on 20 August 2015 by ‎Wikimandia (talk · contribs), claiming that "he's not Hasidic". -- -- -- 03:59, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

He's an Orthodox Jew and this is in plenty of sources. Look at Steven Hill's own biography - the very same source used to claim he is a "staunch Skver Hasid" in this article says in his own article that he was inspired by the Skver rebbe to be more observant. Jews who study or admire aspects of Hasidim are not necessarily Hasids nor would they consider themselves such. Per BLP guidelines, specific religious beliefs should not be stated unless it is reported in reliable sources that someone either practices a religion or view himself/herself as being of this religion. —Мандичка^YO 😜 05:36, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

Related dynasty

I think that Skwer Boro Park should be an Article for itself and just to have a link from the Skver article.

Skwer (Skver) Boro Park Chusid

I'm not sure that it merits its own article - none of the other groups that have different branches have different articles - see Klausenberg, Viznitz, Spinka, Nadvorna, Karlin, etc. etc. However, I have brought your change into the uniform style, even though I disagree. I think it should be discussed here and not simply done - does anyone have two cents to put in?Itzik18 21:22, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

I disagree too...why we don't quit this and put all into one article? kol tuv Bresolver 02:25, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

The fact is that it is two separate dynasties which decent from the same roots, however it is totally different. Each of them has their own Strengths, Philosophy and Lifestyle (no one is putting down or claiming one is less then the other). Of course it merits it’s own article, its only to the benefit of both dynasties to have there own article where each can describe themselves better. Poyhk Chazie Mahy Ahmha D'var Just ask anyone who has ever been to Skver (New Square) or stepped in any of their Shtieblech in Boro Park or elsewhere and was in Skwer - Boro Parker Shul if they are two separate dynasties. Of course it is, and the same applies to I am a proud Chusid; E. Israel - Monsey, Karlin - Pinsk Karlin and so on. There is nothing wrong in having two separate articles maybe you are a pessimist or just happen look on things the wrong way. Chusid

I belive as well it should be two separate articles any time there is a related dynasty, why not???Kookooreekoo

What if we did that for every Spinka, Nadvorna, and Biala einikel? it would be out of control Itzik18 21:17, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

Itzik'l, there is a different between just a B'nashkel Vs. a Chasidus (dynasty). See Klausenberg, Viznitz, Skver, and Karlin have separate established dynasties. Such Viznitz (E. Israel) - Viznitz Monsey, Klausenberg (Boro Park) - Tzans Klausenberg (E. Israel), Skver (New Square) - Skwer Boro Park, Karlin - Pinsk Karlin. All of them have thier own Mosdos, Yeshivas, and Schools and have carved out their own unique path in practicing Chasidus. Therefore they all merit thier own article.

The fact is that Skwer Boro Park and Skver descend from the same dynasty of Skvira in Ukraine. However, today they are totally different, just ask anyone who knows. They are different with Minhagim, different works, and have a whole different prospective. it is only to the benefit to keep it separate--Chusid 21:43, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

Okey, i didn't know..sorry..kol tuv Bresolver 01:38, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

But all of those you have mentioned share one article on Wikipedia. I agree that they are separate groups completlely, however all of those groups share one article that mentions both within the one article. Look at all of the other articles in the "Hasidic dynasty" category. Why is Skver the only one to have separate articles, while those major chassidusn that you have mentioned share. The reason that the others share is to be fair to those like Spinka and Nadvorna, because there would be no end. Thus, here on Wikipedia, all of the information is presented of course, however they can share one article with separate major headings. A psharah would be to give Skver a category, just like Satmar, Bobov, Belz, and Ger have presently, and put the two articles in the one category. Better yet, make the category Chernobyl, and put all of the Chernobyl dynasties in the category, with all of the Chernobyl dynasties in the category. The same can be done with other dynasties when separate articles are written about various branches. Itzik18 02:54, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

I like your idea Itzik'l, it sounds good. However, one concern that I have is, that on the current page of the Chernobyl dynasty is, that are many people that actually don’t belong there becouse they are not Mamshichim of The Chernobyleir Gayzha (carrying on the legacy of Chernobyl). In my opinon, only somone who lives the legacy of Chernobyl (he does not have to be a Grand Rabbi) should be on that page. There are many Chernobyleir Einiklach today that The Meor Einayim or The Chernobyleir Magid are not happy with them, and they know that. Before we proceed with such an idea we should have a very clear guideline on this very sensitive matter. Also I would suggest to run a demo first (perhaps in word) to make sure that there are no glitches. Together we can be Marbeha K'vod Shumayim.--Chusid 17:35, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

I think this relates to the question I've brought up in General Discussions below. Is this an article on the Skver dynasty or the Skver community? If the former, NS-Skver and BP-Skver certainly belong together. If we're talking about communities though, they certainly have very little shaychus to one another (even though, on a personal level, the Rebbes themselves have been quite close).

Hence, my own feeling is that they should be together if someone can add enough information that applies equally to both. If we can get some consensus on their shared history then they might belong. Then again, maybe there isn't much to share between them. NS-Skver is characterized overwhelmingly by the Skverer Shtetl and its lifestyle. It's questionable that we can find a shared philosophy other than the general one shared by all or most chasidim. --Kotzker 20:04, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

• I would suggest that the article Skver should be restricted just to the dynasty, the history, lineage, etc. Then have separate articles on Skver-New Square, Skwer-Boro Park, and Skver-Flatbush. By doing so, each article would be more focused on each ones' lifestyle, costumes (minhagim) institutions, etc. What do you think?--Chusid 19:27, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

General Discussion

This article seems to be susceptible to meandering edits incorporating content not entirely in place. I did the initial elaboration on the bare-bones frame put up along with the other chasidic dynasties, so I tried now to tighten up some of the info and keep the content strictly topical. I think an encyclopedia's primary purpose is to be informative, rather than entertaining, so I've removed some of the info that seems to meander a bit. I don't think this page should serve as a place for all Skvere mayselech.

Reb Hershele was a minor figure in the annals of Skver. He was never considered the father of the sect. If we are to go farther than Reb Itzik'l, we'd move up the chernobyl lineage rather than the line to the Baal shem tov.

I've sought to tighten up the background info on Reb Itzikl's appointment. It's a Hasidic legend that doesn't work as a focal story.

The whole paragraph on Reb Itzik'l having an open heart for every Jew, and how he traveled widely, and how his fame spread, etc., seems a bit rhetorical, and can probably be said equally of almost every known Rebbe. I've therefore removed it.

I don't know that Skvere Chasidim were masters of Maharal although it is said that Reb Itzik'l was.

I think it's generally agreed that Wikipedia articles should include only verifiable or commonly acknowledged info, stated in an objective manner. The general hyperbole common to a chasidish newspaper, like such-and-such Rebbe's very inspiring visit for shabbos, or how greatly moved the masses were by the speeches of such and such Rebbe, and the like, should probably be kept to a minimum. Comments about a certain Rebbe's love for Jews, or his great tzidkus, etc. is generally not of an objective, verifiable nature--although actions and verifiable events certainly are. See Wikipedia:verifiability,Wikipedia:NPOV.

There's also an important determination that needs to be discussed (which applies equally to all the other articles about hasidic dynasties). Is this an article about Skver as a community, their lifestyle and philosophy, and the major events that shaped them, or is this an article about the dynasty, i.e. the Rebbes and their lineage, with their personal bios and life stories? I believe it's the former, with only minor focus on the latter. And I therefore propose that the Title be changed to Skverer Hasidim (or Chasidim).

--Kotzker 00:55, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

Kotzker; It appears to me that you are a valuable contributor. However no one knows better them a Skerrer Chusid himself. By working together we can make this a very nice article. Also, some changes you made I would like to revise it a little bit however will not do so before I discuss it with you.

• Chusid, It's great to have a Skverer chusid here to help in the process. For those of us who hold Skver close to our hearts, we'd like to see an article that is meaningful and informative, and that adheres at the very least to the guidelines of verifiability and NPOV. So it's great to be able to work together. --Kotzker 21:15, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

First let me answer some of your questions here.

1) You wrote: Reb Hershele was a minor figure in the annals of Skver. He was never considered the father of the sect. If we are to go farther than Reb Itzik'l, we'd move up the chernobyl lineage rather than the line to the Baal shem tov.

• this not true, there is even a Yurtzait Thish on Chol Hamoed. And I don’t know what you mean by the father of the sect. This is true that in his time Skver was not a Chasidus and it happened slowly in the times of Reb Itzik'l. However he was Rebbe in Shtuet and Reb Itzik'l was elected to take over his place. I believe if you will tell the Skverrer Rebbe that Reb Hershele was a minor figure in the annals of Skver he will very upset at you for saying so.

• • I may be mistaken, but I think you got the yuhtzeit tischen wrong. There's a yuhrtzeit tisch the first day of Chol Hamoed Pesach for Reb Itzik'l skverer. On Chol Hamoed Sukkos, for the yuhrtzeit of RH"S, there is only laykech and lechaim in the Rebbe's sukkah after schachris. The only tischen on chol hamoed sukkos, I believe, are in the evening before the start of Hoshana Rabba (ushpieza d'yosef), in the very early morning of Hoshana Rabba--before Alos (ushpiza d'duvid), and the Hoshana Rabba tisch in the late afternoon.

• • The reason I believe RH"S to be minor is that the literature, for what there is, makes little of him relative to those of the direct ben-achar-ben lineage. That's not to say he wasn't important. Of course he was. He's what makes the Skverer Rebbe the nearest descendent of the Baal Shem Tov alive today. But his importance is the same as that of Reb Pinya M'Ustilla, Friyerdigge Belzer Ruv, The Ustroher Geiza (Reb Elyukim Getz, Reb Yakov Yosef, Reb Pinchas, Rav Yayvi), and the others who are important to the history and lore, but are not in the ben-achar-ben lineage of Chernobyl-Skver.

• • With all due respect to Skverer Rebbe, whether he gets upset or not is, I believe, of little importance to Wikipedia. There are guidelines here that are a bit different from those of Mechon Mishkenos Yakov. :-) (I don't mean it disparagingly. Just that this requires a different approach.) --Kotzker 20:41, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

2) You wrote: I've sought to tighten up the background info on Reb Itzikl's appointment. It's a Hasidic legend that doesn't work as a focal story.

• how do you know better that waht the current Rebbe heard from his father (Reb Yaakov Yosef) and he heard it form his father reb Itzik'l himself. If there somthing that you dont belive it does not take away that fact of a story.

• • Legend does not mean untrue. It just means that it's part of an oral tradition. In fact, in this case, considering how sparingly these stories are told and how the telling of them by the Rebbe has been so amazingly similar over the past 38 year, there is much reason to believe that they've been imparted faithfully. But still, a legend is a legend. There are no published sources having close knowledge of the actual events.--Kotzker 21:14, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

3) You wrote: The whole paragraph on Reb Itzik'l having an open heart for every Jew, and how he traveled widely, and how his fame spread, etc., seems a bit rhetorical, and can probably be said equally of almost every known Rebbe. I've therefore removed it.

• Every one know that the children of the Cernoblir Magid where traveling more then other Rebbes, and Reb Itzik'l was know to travel more then his brothers.
  • This needs a citation. (See Wikipedia:citing sources.) But in any event, my main objection was that staing a Rebbe's love for Jews or the people's love for a Rebbe (or something to that effect) is not encyclopedic. I would love to see a citation of a reputable source about Reb Itzikl's travels, and the attitude of the populations to his visits as 'manifested in actions'.--Kotzker 21:14, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

4) You wrote: I don't know that Skvere Chasidim were masters of Maharal although it is said that Reb Itzik'l was.

• From where should you know? Reb Itzik'l once said, Men darf zich farmashkenen die talis un tefilin tzie kennen koifen the seifrai Maharal it is also know he had a whole group of Benai Aliyah who where masters in Maharal and Rashis Chuchma who where privileged to see him every Friday night and he discuses d with them Hoyeche Zachen and the Rebbe has already told this story many times. If you will come to Skver today you will see how many yungeleit learn Maharal and there is no Hadrucha Schmiez where the Rebbe does not mention a Maharal.

• • Yes, that is a well-known saying of Reb Itzik'l. And you're also right about the Friday night group. But was it really that significant as a basic work of Jewish thought to Skverer chasidim? I wonder. Would you say Chovos Halevuvos is a basic work to Vizhnitzer chasidim because the Rebbe (Benei Brak) encourages his chasidim to learn it? I wouldn't think so. But I could be wrong.

• • Sifrei Maharal today are certainly not held in the same esteem as Me'or Einayim and Or Hachaim. There may be a fad today to study it, just as occassionally there have been fads for learning Sidurei Shel Shabbos, Yosher DIvrei Emes, etc. But would they make a public shiur Thursday or Friday night? Are there many people in Skver who are beki'im in Sifrei Maharal the way they are about OHa"ch or MeoEi"n? (Moshe Braun? Anshel Valadarsky?) True, the Rebbe cites from Sifrei Maharl in the shmiesen, but are they emphasized as something to learn? --Kotzker 21:14, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

Kotzker, you seem to know a little, so let me explain so you know more.

• • The most important chasidishe seforim in skver has allways been the Meor Einayim and sifrai Ha'Toldos. As the Rebbe said many times (he even told it to me personally) ess is the kayli rishon fien chasidus, ess is m'vashel (it is the most potent works on chasidus), Ohr Hachayim was an important limud by all chassidim not just in Skver as you know. It became more significant in Skver when Reb Yakov Yosef said vie asoy ken men zayn daym ohr hachayim as men lerent nisht dem ohe hachayim (how can one see the light in life when he does not study the ohr hachayim - light of life). Because the Toldos is more dificult then Meor Enayim and Ohr Hachayim becouse as it has alot of pilpul, most people don't learn it (by the way, I do it with my 14 year old son) therefore, it has been excepted by most people like you (who are not skverer chasidim) that the most important works is Meor Enayim and Ohr Hachayim.

• • What you wrote about learning Yosher Divrei Emes, The Rebbe (or maybe his father, Reb Yakov Yosef) said dus is the alef bais fien chasidus(the first steps to leran the work of chassidus). so this is also widely used as one of the chasidishe seforim people learn, and is even more populer by the bucharim (young boys). The same applies to Sidurei Shel Shabbos, the Rebbe encourged it very much. thats why there has been recently put together a public shiur.

• • So now lets go to the Maharal; this is sure that it has been studied intensely by Reb Itzikel Skverer, and that the Rebbe learns is a lot, and quotes the Maharal in almost all the shmiesen, and there are many people in skver who learn it all the time. You asked; if they will make a public shiur? the answer is, if people will ask for a shiur it will be. However most people I know, who appreciate and and enjoy learning the Maharal do it on their own. and to answer your last question; but are they emphasized as something to learn? The only chasidishe seforim "emphasized", are Ohr Hachayim, Meor Enayim, and Toldos, as I mentioned above. --Chusid 21:18, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

5) You wrote: There's also an important determination that needs to be discussed (which applies equally to all the other articles about Hasidic dynasties). Is this an article about Skver as a community, their lifestyle and philosophy, and the major events that shaped them, or is this an article about the dynasty, i.e. the Rebbes and their lineage, with their personal bios and life stories? I believe it's the former, with only minor focus on the latter. And I therefore propose that the Title be changed to Skverer Hasidim (or Chasidim).

• I respectfully disagree with you. However lets hear what others have to say and the same should apply to all Dynastys like Satmar, Belz, and Bobov.--Chusid 16:20, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

Chusid, I've looked up some of these issues over Shabbos.

1. Reb Itzik'ls travels: Sipurim Ummamorim Yekorim (Zikernick, Warsaw 1903) relates the well-known vort by Reb Itzik'l justifying his custom not to travel, unlike his father and brothers who traveled a lot. Hakol Talui b'mazel, afilu sefer torah shebheichel, the sefer torah that stays in the heichel (a reference to his staying at home), has greater mazel.

1. Reb Hershele Skverer: Yachas Chernobyl V'ruzhin lists him as Reb Tzvi Titover, which, although not conclusive evidence for anything, I think is telling. His father, of course, was Reb Arele Titover, so it makes sense.

1. Sifrei Maharal: Zikernick relates Reb Itzik'l statement that as a young men he had known all sifrei maharal by heart. But we still need some evidence that it was commonly studied by the chasidim.

--Kotzker 02:22, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

How about an article with a name like Skver (Hasidic sect)? -- -- -- 04:12, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

P.S. Other options would include: Skver (Hasidic group), Skver (Hasidic movement), or Skver Hasidism. -- -- -- 21:29, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

Unique Customs

As a continuation of the above discussion about customs, I propose we add a new section called Unique Customs that would outline respectfully and informatively the various customs with which Skver is known. It would be nice if reasons could be given for these customs as well.

Some that come to mind are:

• Reciting the full Hallel with its benediction during baking matzos on Erev Pesach. (With legend of Eliyahu Hanavi.)
• Reciting the entire Psalms Shabbos morning before Shachris (also part of Eliyahu Hanavi legend).
• Placing a newborn in a makshift crib such as a large drawer. (Part of a general practice refraining from using permanenet objects for the first 30 days, such as a crib, stroller, or even store-purchased clothes--the baby is often wrapped in a Komono.)
• Giving a male child his first haircut at the age of two (as opposed to the more widespread custom at age three; the cited source is Rashi on Vayigomel Hayeled, who says that yitzchok turned two then and Avraham invited dignitaries to celebrate; still needs a more contemporary source, or at least within the rabbinic tradition).

Attire:

• Boots for married men on Shabbos and holidays. (Part of the general Hasidic custom to avoid full-length pants as too Westernized. There's a story here involving the previous Rebbe's older brother, Reb Itzik'l Keshenever, whose mother-in-law wouldn't allow him to wear the traditional knee length socks, since her husband, from the Chernobyl-Loev lineage, didn't wear them. The Rebbe, R' Yakov Yosef, in deference to his older brother and mentor, compromised by wearing boots.)
• Real burial shrouds instead of a kittel for Yom Kippur and Pesach seder.

Liturgy and Prayer:

• Including the word keitz in the kaddish. A practice with sources in medieval times. (Mentioned in Avudraham.)

Then there are customs unique to the Rebbe's family:

• Choson muhel. The bride and groom dance together on the night before the wedding. (A rite once fiarly widespread in Jewish communities in Eastern Europe until banned in Hungary by the Yismach Moshe for fears of leading to debauchery. Speculation: might have been due to concerns that the kallah would be ritually impure, and once married, her husband can no longer have physical contact until the Mikve.)

If anyone has anything to add it would be very much appreciated. Once this is fleshed out a bit I'll add it to the main article.

--Kotzker 22:22, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

Sources

I'm all in favor of the info here. Is there anyway to get some sources??? Joe407 (talk) 12:20, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Not exactly "case closed", but something has been done. Someone added a template [instance], saying "{{unreliable sources|date=January 2013}}" ... which displays as:

That should get the ball rolling (eventually ...) (right?) --Mike Schwartz (talk) 20:10, 19 March 2018 (UTC)

Family tree

Can someone please fix the family tree? Rabbi Yechiel Michl Twersky of Skwer-Boro Park is the son of Rabbi Dovid Twersky of Skwer-Boro Park, son of Rabbi Yitzchak Twersky of Skwer-Boro Park. -- -- -- 03:27, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

 Done by User:Redaktor. Thanks. -- -- -- 20:39, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

Minor clarification: What does "wb" mean? ("before moving to wb")

These comments here about a certain sentence, are in reference to the latest version of this article "as of" when these comments were written. In case things have changed by the time you read this, that was the [first] (and, at the time, the only) "19 March 2018" version of the article.

There is (in that version of the article) a sentence, (in the paragraph just above the section called "Family tree") that says:

Later, when his uncle the Grand Rabbi Yakov Yosef Twersky of Skver came to America, he arranged all the paperwork and visas for the entire family for them to enter the US while he got him a house and a shul in Borough Park before moving to wb where later he moved to New Square.

I have some questions (maybe "related").

1. Should perhaps the last 6 (or 7?) words of that, be a separate sentence? (or if not, then perhaps the word "where" could be changed to "whereas" or "although", to serve as a conjunction?) The word "where" sounds like it is referring to the time (the day, or the year) when something happened. To me, at least, it does not seem clear.
2. Should perhaps the phrase "moving to wb" be changed? Maybe it's just me, but I "for one" do not know what the word "wb" means, there. If it stands for something, then maybe it should be spelled out. Another idea: If there are some changes ... e.g., to change the last 6 (or 7) words of the sentence, to be a separate sentence, OR to be joined by a different conjunction somehow, then ... maybe the word "wb" could ALSO be removed (or clarified) at the same time. Please forgive my ignorance if "wb" is something that [almost] everyone except for me, already understands.

Any suggestions? or other advice? --Mike Schwartz (talk) 20:48, 19 March 2018 (UTC)

 Fixed. Thanks for voicing your concerns. I hope it's clear now. -- -- -- 22:34, 19 March 2018 (UTC)

dates

I am surprised that some dates are given only anno mundi. It makes the article less useful than it could be.--2607:FEA8:D5DF:F3D9:C87:9B39:6009:E606 (talk) 02:23, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

Feel free to add secular/Christian years. -- -- -- 07:52, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

reads like a PR pamphlet - bulding a shtetl??

There are no Shtetls in the US. Shtetls are small towns created by pressive dictatorships where there was Jewsih government that represented the government and that was coercive. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 166.84.1.3 (talk) 09:57, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

"Skver (Hasidic dynasty" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Skver (Hasidic dynasty has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 February 14 § Skver (Hasidic dynasty until a consensus is reached. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 01:24, 14 February 2024 (UTC)