Sefer Haminhagim is a concise but very comprehensive compilation of Lubavitcher minhagim, that were originally publicized by the Rebbe in the hosafos to the maamorim of the Frierdige Rebbe, and later published as a separate sefer, by the Rebbe’s instruction and under his guidance. It is a sefer that, as its’ title implies, is geared solely to clarifying Chabad minhagim (and primarily those in which there are differences between what is practiced by other groups). There are no lengthy pilpulim or involved analysis, nothing more than the briefest footnotes to provide some reference to sources.
And one story.
Now, in a sefer of minhagim, stories would not necessarily be out of place, there is conceivably a close relationship between stories and practices. But, in this sefer, which is apparently designed to confine itself to the basic facts, even stories are not included.
With one exception.
Amongst the minhagim of Tisha B’Av, we find the above story quoted and retold. Which I always found rather curious. Of all of the chassidishe stories in circulation, many of which enhance, explain and illuminate various laws and customs, what is so special and unique about the above story, that it is the only one to be made a part of this sefer? While it is unquestionably a geshmakeh maaseh, with a timeless message, that does not seem to set it apart from countless other stories. What is it about this particular story, that gave it the distinction of being the one and only story to be included in sefer haminhagim?
[For some reason, I don’t think the Rebbe was advocating setting up a people-fishing tournament in 770 on Tisha B’Av, although that may have added a new dimension to some of the conflicts that already exist there].
When I once shared this question with a friend, and he suggested that this story was included because of the great importance of distancing sadness. This answer, however, didn’t satisfy me: a) It doesn’t appear that the “sin” of too much sadness is the primary failing in Lubavitch (although it may be argued that this resulted from the inclusion of the story in sefer haminhogim). b) To convey that message, it would suffice to state the fact (that Chassidus totally negates any excessive sadness etc.), but it doesn’t seem to necessitate the relating of the story. c) The primary point of the story doesn’t even seem to be the rejection of sadness (that is merely the background and preface of the story).
Therefore, to me, the question remains: What is the supreme importance of the message of this particular story, that required it to be included in the context of sefer haminhagim?
