Version Colors
Hour with their rebbe
There is a program currently being promoted under the benign and even inspiring title “Hour with the Rebbe.” On Yud Shevat, bochurim gather in 770 to watch what is advertised as a farbrengen of the Rebbe. At first glance, this appears not only appropriate but admirable. Yud Shevat is among the most significant dates on the Chabad calendar, and the opportunity for bochurim to spend time connected to the Rebbe, in 770 itself, sounds like an initiative worthy of broad communal support. The organizers proudly note that 56 yeshivos are participating.
But appearances can be misleading.
Upon closer inspection, the program is not an “hour with the Rebbe” in any meaningful or honest sense. It is not a farbrengen as it was lived, delivered, or intended. It is a carefully engineered presentation built around a singular ideological message, delivered through a montage of short, selectively chosen video clips. The overwhelming majority of the hour is devoted to one theme alone: promoting the idea of the Rebbe as Moshiach.
This is not incidental. It is not balanced. And it is certainly not representative.
The structure of the program is revealing. Clips rarely last more than a few minutes. They are removed from context, stitched together, and repeated year after year with minimal variation. Excerpts such as “Menachem shemo,” footage of idud to Yechi, and similar moments dominate the presentation almost entirely. What is conspicuously absent are long-form farbrengens, sustained sichos, or the broader, richer tapestry of the Rebbe’s teachings—on avodas Hashem, Mivtzoim, shlichus, Limud HaTorah, or any of the Rebbe's typical messages to Bochurim.
In other words, this is not exposure to the Rebbe. It is exposure to an agenda.
What makes this especially troubling is not only the content, but the process. Hanhala are generally not present for the program. They are not involved in vetting the material, contextualizing it, or offering guidance. They understandably take the initiative at face value: a wholesome, Rebbe-centered Yud Shevat program in 770. Meanwhile, their bochurim sit through an hour of curated messaging.
This creates a serious breach of trust.
Also concerning is the secondary message being conveyed: that bochurim today are incapable of sitting through a real farbrengen. That the Rebbe’s authentic delivery—its length, complexity, and depth—must be replaced with soundbites, spectacle, and repetition. That on Yud Shevat, of all days, in 770 itself, authenticity must be sacrificed for accessibility.
This should alarm anyone who takes chinuch seriously.
It is also not happening in a vacuum. This program is run by the same group behind the Shvil and Dollars initiatives. The pattern is consistent. The external trappings of tradition are meticulously recreated—the Rebbe’s chair is set up, 770 is staged to resemble a farbrengen—and the substance is filtered through a narrow ideological lens. The environment signals authenticity; the content delivers something else entirely.
That this approach has been normalized across dozens of yeshivos is perhaps the most disturbing element of all.
If the goal is to promote a particular belief, then it should be done honestly, openly, and with accountability. Call it what it is. Do not market it as a neutral “Hour with the Rebbe.” Do not rely on the sanctity of Yud Shevat or the symbolism of 770 to lend legitimacy to a selective narrative.
Hanhala must take responsibility. They deserve to know exactly what their bochurim are being shown, by whom, and for what purpose. They must ask whether this aligns with their values, their educational goals, and their understanding of what it means to connect bochurim to the Rebbe.
If the goal is truly to expose bochurim to the Rebbe, there is a simple and honest alternative: rent a venue in Crown Heights and show a real farbrengen—complete, unedited, and unfiltered. Trust the bochurim with the Rebbe’s words as they were spoken. Trust the Rebbe’s Torah to stand on its own.
Anything less is not an hour with the Rebbe. It is an hour with a message—one that deserves scrutiny, not silence.