Stuck in a Hole? Stop digging
Yeshivism, Chassidus, and Me
A Sephardic man came to the dollar
line and asked the Lubavitcher Rebbe for advice on how to be more successful in
his kiruv work. The Rebbe told him that all the kiruv gatherings should have
some Torah because “Talmud Torah k'neged Kulam” and therefore the Torah would
influence the attendees to do mitzvos.
I was surprised to hear the Rebbe
employ the phrase, even though he was a great talmid chochom, because I hear
Litvacks say it so much. I associate this phrase with Litvacks more than you
might associate any one phrase with any group of people. If you say, what's the
first phrase that comes into mind when you think of the French”? I'd say “viva
la difference”, or “comme ci comme ca” or “Liberté, égalité, fraternité”. And
the British? Maybe “keep calm and carry on”, or “God save the Queen”, or
“Britannia rules the waves”. If you say Litvach, I hear “Talmud Torah k'neged
Kulam”.
I wonder is it fair to even call them
Litvacks? The ones of today are not from Lithuania and are different in
significant ways from the old Litvacks as I will explain. They are products
largely of Brooklyn and modern Israel. Modern yeshivish or Yeshivists are
probably more apt labels because they build all of life around the yeshiva, and
that was not the case in Lithuania where the yeshivas were few and small. One
does hear an emphasis on this idea of ‘kneged kulam” going back to Europe, so
there is some real history to it, but today’s Litvacks take it to another level.
Thus, I’ll refer to them as modern Litvacks or Yeshivists as distinct from
old-time Litvacks.
In the modern Litivsh world, the
phrase “Talmud Torah k'neged Kulam” is referenced so often and with such a
specific meaning that one might not realize that the Rebbe was offering a different
meaning, which I'll describe in a moment. The standard contemporary Litvish
meaning is that Torah is better and higher than mitzvos and earns you more
reward – much more reward.
I grit my teeth as I write that
because I find it offensive frankly, even as I realize that some scholars
portray it that way. The Talmud Yerushalmi on mishnah 1:1 in Peah saysרבי ברכיה ורבי חייא דכפר דחומין חד אמר אפילו כל העולם כולו אינו
שוה לדבר אחד של תורה וחד אמר אפי' כל מצותיה של תורה אינן שוות לדבר א' מן התורה “All the mitzvos of the Torah are not
equal to one word of Torah.” So the yeshivists do have what to rely on for
their perspective. Interestingly, the Vilna Gaon cites the Yershualmi but still
says that the purpose of Torah is mitzvos, just as the purpose of a tree is its
fruit. (Even Shelaima, Chapter on Torah) This idea seems to come from the
Gemara in Kiddushin which says Torah is greater than doing because it leads to
doing. So just because Torah study gives the most schar, doesn't mean that we
shouldn't focus on mitzvos. Yom Kippur is the holiest day of the year, but we
don’t turn every day into Yom Kippur. Nevertheless, that is not how many
contemporary yeshiva people approach it.
The contemporary Litivsh outlook (not that of
the Gra) sounds to me insulting to mitzvos and is demotivating. Why would I do
them if they are so much less worthy? “You gotta do what you gotta do,” I was
once told by a well-known Modern Orthodox Litvish talmid chocham. What he meant
is that he prefers Torah, but we are obligated to do those silly mitzvos when
we must. That did not motivate me and neither does the idea of doing everything
for reward. It seems selfish to me. As the Mishnah says, “Do not be as slaves,
who serve their master for the sake of reward. Rather, be as slaves who serve
their master not for the sake of reward. And the fear of Heaven should be upon
you.” (Pirkei Avos 1:3)
Rav Samson Raphael Hirsch in the 19
Letters (Letter 18) criticizes the Rambam for his view of mitzvos as tools for
philosophic understanding since it led many people away from mitzvah
observance.
For him, too, self-perfecting through the knowledge of truth
was the highest aim, the practical he deemed subordinate. For him knowledge of
God was the end, not the means; hence he devoted his intellectual powers to
speculations upon the essence of Deity, and sought to bind Judaism to the
results of his speculative investigations as to postulates of science or
faith...
What was the consequence? After these opinions had brought
about the natural phenomenon that men who believed themselves the possessors of
the knowledge which the commandments were designed to inculcate, thought
themselves absolved both from the fulfillment of the commandment, intended only
as a guide, and from the study of the science of the commandments, which had
lost for them all intellectual significance; other men, possessed of a deeper
comprehension of Judaism, became at first enemies of this philosophical spirit,
and later, of all specifically intellectual and philosophical pursuits in
general.
It seems to me that the criticism can
be applied to the contemporary Litivsh-Yeshivish attitude as well. For the
Rambam, philosophy was the goal. For Yeshivists, it's lomdus. What they have in
common is making the mind the be all and end all. While Frankfurt was once a
bastion of Torah observance, by the time Rav Hirsch got there in the mid-19th
century it was hard to find a minyan or any young men that put on tefillin. So
he was speaking from personal observation of what results when people don't
value mitzvos.
Rav Hirsch believed that the Rambam
got this view from the gentiles. He didn't solve the problems facing his era
entirely from within Judaism. He looked outside.
This great man, to whom, and to whom alone, we owe the
preservation of practical Judaism to our time, is responsible, because he
sought to reconcile Judaism with the difficulties which confronted it from
without, instead of developing it creatively from within, for all the good and
the evil which bless and afflict the heritage of the father. His peculiar
mental tendency was Arabic-Greek, and his conception of the purpose of life the
same. He entered into Judaism from without, bringing with him opinions of whose
truth he had convinced himself from extraneous sources and — he reconciled.
(Letter 18)
It's the same with today's Yeshivists,
I believe, who in many respects are imitating secular academia, which also
ignores the practical and seeks only brilliance and intellectual breakthrough.
I didn't grow up with mitzvahs, so I
need to work hard to apply myself to them. I am not just running on habit or
family pressure. For me, social pressure and habit runs the other way. Anything
that minimizes the importance of mitzvos is problematic for me. I need encouragement.
The Yeshivist read on “Talmud Torah k'neged Kulam” is discouraging to me. In
the world I'm from, school was everything, higher education was everything. We
didn't talk very much about good deeds or proper behavior. I don't need
encouragement to study. I need encouragement to do mitzvos.
Maybe that's not the case for
frum-from-birth yeshiva guys. I don't have secret knowledge of what goes on in
their heads; although my own observation of their behavior tells me that in
general their valuation of mitzvos needs some work. Yes, they are careful to
pick out that perfect esrog but with chesed, tefillah, hachnachas orchim,
tznius, and many other mitzvos many do not appear to be so careful. The esrog
picking is a technical activity, not fraught with feeling. These Yeshivist guys
are interested in the technical. I was telling one guy of my experience
watching the Amshinover Rebbe daven, how moving it was, how he seemed to be
spending more than 45 minutes on one bracha. (It could have been hours, but we
had to leave the room.) I felt as thought I was seeing davening for the first
time and this affected my Yom Kippur, lifting me up. This Yeshivist didn't ask
me any questions about the power of the davening but only about the zmanim that
the Rebbe seem to be violating.
I heard one Modern Orthodox Zionist Yeshivist
rabbi tells his congregation that he tells his students that keeping mitzvos is
easy. I wrote to him about this. Shmiras enayim is easy? Maybe for him, not for
most of us. Being completely honest is easy? Doing all the chesed you can do is
easy? I'm guessing he doesn't work very hard at mitzvos. He never wrote back to
me.
I went to a Yeshivish simchas beis
sho'eva this week where a rabbi stood up and talked about how each of the 4
minim symbolize 4 different kinds of people. We have all heard this before. The
haddasah has good deeds. The esrog has Torah and deeds equally. The lulav is
the scholar. Good deeds are very nice, but Torah is the best he said. The usual
speech. What else do they ever talk about? Hold on to the sugya he said. In
Chassidic thought, Succos is a time of achdus in the nation. It's a time when
even the goyim are involved in religious life bringing their korbonos. It's a
time of dwelling with Hashem. It's a bringing together of all the parts of life
for unity. None of that was mentioned at the Yeshivish gathering, only Torah
study was mentioned.
Another example from a renown
American Yeshivist rabbi who I usually like.
Yaakov tells the messengers to say to Eisav, “With Lavan I
dwelt (garti), and I stayed there until now.” (Bereshis 32:5). Rashi famously
comments that the Hebrew word garti (I dwelt) equals 613 in gematria, as if to
tell Eisav, “even though I lived with the wicked Lavan, I kept the 613
commandments there and did not learn from his evil ways.” Yaakov telegraphs a
message to his brother, “You should know, I was living with uncle Lavan. He is
a wicked person. I had to put up with all of his shenanigans all this time. I
was away from any support system. Who knows what could happen to a person
spiritually under those circumstances? But you should understand that I lived
with him all this time and it did not affect me. I remained an Erliche Yid
(honest Jew), despite the fact that no one was watching. I learned nothing from
him!”
The question that must be asked is the following: When you
want to impress someone, you must speak that person’s language. If you want to
impress someone who is wealthy you need to indicate to him how wealthy you are.
When you are speaking to a sports hero, don’t tell him that you know the Talmud
by heart. “You play football at MetLife Stadium. I finished Shas at MetLife
Stadium.” That will have no credibility to someone who is a linebacker for the
New York Giants or Jets!
Look at the switch here. The posuk,
midrash, and rashi talk about 613 mitzvos and this contemporary rabbi explains
it by talking about finishing Shas.
He continues:
"Yaakov Avinu is saying to Eisav, “No. For you it may
be a façade, but for me it is not a façade.”
"Rav Druk gives an example. He says that he used to say
a shiur in a certain Yeshiva for twenty or thirty years. One day, he was
running late and was about to walk into the Yeshiva. Across the street was a
shul. The Shamash of the shul came out looking for a tenth man for their Mincha
minyan. He approached Rav Mordechai Druk and asked him to come inside and make
the minyan. Rav Druk apologized, “I am sorry. I say a regular shiur here. I am
late for the shiur as it is, I can’t come in. People are waiting for me.” The
Shamash said to him, “Ach! Have you ever done anything in your life for free?
You are going to say the shiur because you get paid for it. Come to daven
Mincha and nobody is going to pay you. That is why you are passing up Mincha
and going to say your shiur.”
Somehow again all explanations
contain imagery of learning and shiurim and even here at the expense of
davening.
Here's a dvar Torah I just heard from
a Yeshivist Rosh Yeshiva.
I would like to share with you a short vort on last week's
parshah. It says ועשיו איש שדה.
Rashi explains that as איש בטל.
My rebbe Rav Leib Bakst ztl used to say that this was the root of Eisav’s
issues. At the base of all the other horrible things he did, he was a groisah
batlan.
How do we understand this, that batalah is the root of evil?
And it's in chazal בטלה מביא לידי שיעמום בטלה מביא לידי זימה .
We can explain as follows: why does an open apple rot, but a
stone does not? It is because an apple is a living species and when it does not
fulfill its purpose it decays. So, too, a Yid is a neshama, חלק אלוה ממעל a living spiritual species. When we don’t fill our time
with positive activities we ch"v decay. That was Eisav. Yakov was the
exact opposite. By being a יושב ביה”מ he was invigorated with life even to a point where
chazal say תענית ה -- יעקב אבינו לא מת.
That signifies that the Talmid Chochom is so full of life from his Torah that
his spirituality keeps him alive forever.
That's what Yaakov was to him, a
lamdan. All the other stuff said about him in the Chumash doesn't register.
Only that he studied Torah in the tents matters in this dvar Torah.
Here's another dvar Torah from the
same Rosh Yeshiva:
Let me share with you a moiradika dvar Torah I discussed on
Shabbos in the yeshiva. Reuven lost the crowns of Bechor, Malchus and Kehunah
because of his actions. Those crowns became limited to Levi and Yehudah.
However, there's a crown which is greater than all of them, the crown of Torah.
As the Mishna in 'פרק ו of Avos says is greater than all of these. And yet
Chazal say, כתר של תורה מונח כל מי שרוצה יבא ויקח See: רמב"ם הלכות תלמוד תורה פרק ג' הלכה א', וכן בגמרא יומא עב:
The crown of Torah is open to ALL. We can all chap as much as we want. Hashem
does not set any parameters and boundaries, how much, when, it's unlimited.
What an opportunity!
Nebach,
he's trying to be encouraging, but only for one thing. He left something out, a
different Mishnah in Avos: רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן
אוֹמֵר, שְׁלֹשָׁה כְתָרִים הֵן: כֶּֽתֶר תּוֹרָה, וְכֶֽתֶר כְּהֻנָּה, וְכֶֽתֶר
מַלְכוּת, וְכֶֽתֶר שֵׁם טוֹב עוֹלֶה עַל גַּבֵּיהֶן.
(Avos 4:13) “Rabbi Shimon would say: There are three crowns—the crown of Torah,
the crown of priesthood and the crown of sovereignty—but the crown of good name
surmounts them all.” The Reishis Chochmah explains this as referring to ethical
behavior. This Rosh Yeshiva tries to use Avos to make it seem as if Torah is
the greatest crown when Avos itself says otherwise. I proposed including the
Mishnah about the good name to the dvar Torah, but my proposal was rejected. It's
no wonder there are lapses in observance among these people.
Maybe you can say the same of every
group that in our times there are significant weaknesses in observance. I can't
say that I have made a scientific study of klal Yisrael and it's not my place
to judge everybody. My words here do not constitute a study of the contemporary
Litvish world. Rather, they are an expression of my personal experience in that
world. I speak only for myself and seek to describe the affect various
attitudes have had on me.
I am in quite a predicament because
the common reading of “Talmud Torah k'neged Kulam” is central to the
contemporary Litvish approach to life, and it dominates the part of the frum
world that I live in. In fact, I would say that it is the foundation of the
contemporary Litvish derech. As I mentioned, in my experience it is the most
commonly cited hashkafa. To question it is viewed as questioning life itself. I
have endured many uncomfortable encounters where I dared to raise questions
about this. But I had no choice but to question it as I couldn't get my heart
into this approach to Judaism. I tried for years. And when I say years, I mean
decades – the great majority of my adult life.
Let us note that Chazal employ this
phrasing on numerous other mitzvos such as Shabbos, milah, tzitzit, tzedukah,
and yishuv haaretz.
Tzitzit
: (Nedarim 25a, Menachot 43b)דְּאָמַר מָר שְׁקוּלָה
מִצְוַת צִיצִית כְּנֶגֶד כׇּל מִצְוֹת שֶׁבַּתּוֹרָה
Yishuv
Haaretz: (Tosefta, Avodah Zarah 5) ישרה אדם בארץ ישראל
אפילו בעיר שרובה עובדי כוכבים ולא בחו"ל אפי' בעיר שכולה ישראל מלמד שישיבת
ארץ ישראל שקולה כנגד כל מצות שבתורה
Shabbos:
(Yerushalmi, Berachot 9a)ואת שבת קדשך הודעת להם ומצות
וחוקים ותורה צוית וגו' להודיעך שהיא שקולה כנגד כל מצותיה של תורה
Milah:
(Yerushalmi, Nedarim 12b)כה אמר ה' אם לא בריתי יומם ולילה
חוקות שמים וארץ לא שמתי דבר אחר גדולה המילה שהיא שקולה כנגד כל המצות שבתורה
שנאמר (שמות כד) הנה דם הברית אשר כרת ה' עמכם על כל הדברים האלה
Tzedukah:
(Yerushalmi, Pe’ah 3a)צדקה וגמילת חסדים שקולות כנגד כל
מצותיה של תורה
(Source:
RationalistJudaism.com)
It
is logically impossible for all these things to be equal to all other mitzvot
since each one is included in the other formulations. Thus, the phrase k’neged
kulam cannot be interpreted literally to mean that they are equal to all other
mitzvos and certainly not that they are greater.
Also
problematic is the translation of the word k'neged. It doesn't mean greater.
Consider this:
ארבעה דברים שהן נפרעין מן האדם בעולם
הזה והקרן קיימת לו לעולם הבא ואלו הן ע"ז גילוי עריות ש"ד ולשון הרע
כנגד כולן
There
are four things for which a person is punished in this world, while the
principal remains for him in the World to Come: Idolatry, forbidden
relationships and murder. And lashon hara (evil speech) is k'neged them all.
(Yerushalmi, Peah 4a; Tosefta, Pe’ah 1:2)
Are we going to say that lashon hara
is worse (greater than) than murder?
Moreover, the list of four seems to
correspond to the Mishnah in Peah (1:1)
which is the source of the phrase talmud torah k'neged kulam:
אֵלּוּ דְבָרִים שֶׁאָדָם
אוֹכֵל פֵּרוֹתֵיהֶן בָּעוֹלָם הַזֶּה וְהַקֶּרֶן קַיֶּמֶת לוֹ לָעוֹלָם הַבָּא.
כִּבּוּד אָב וָאֵם, וּגְמִילוּת חֲסָדִים, וַהֲבָאַת שָׁלוֹם
בֵּין אָדָם לַחֲבֵרוֹ,
וְתַלְמוּד תּוֹרָה כְּנֶגֶד
כֻּלָּם
K'neged means adjacent to as in ezer
k'negdo. Shukel means equal. Lashon hara could be viewed as adjacent to all
other mitzvos in that lashon hara produces the heavenly prosecutor without
which all those other crimes cannot be prosecuted. It seems to me that the “Talmud
Torah k'neged Kulam” should be translated as Talmud Torah is adjacent to all
the mitzvos. It is connected to them.
That is what I believe the Rebbe was
saying. Torah connects you to mitzvos, so studying Torah will lead you to do
mitzvos. Talmud Torah k'neged Kulam – the Torah is connected to all the
mitzvos. They aren't in competition. They work together. It's a holistic
system. And the goal isn't necessarily reward in the next world, but the doing
of mitzvos in this world. Rabbi Joseph Solveitchik makes the same point. He was
asked “What do we mean by תלמוד תורה כנגד כולם?”
He answered, “It is not that this mitzvah is equal to all the mitzvos, but
rather that it brings the person to do all the other mitzvos. The whole purpose
of the limud is that it comes to asiah and asiah is the ikur.” (The Rav
Thinking Aloud, p. 69)
Now, Rabbi Soloveitchik was Litvish-
true Litvish; although as a boy he had a Chabad teacher. But I don't imagine
that's solely where his read on “Talmud Torah k'neged Kulam” could have come
from. It comes more likely from the Gemara from Kiddushin that I cited earlier
– Torah is greater because it leads to doing. As mentioned, the Vilna Gaon said
that just as the purpose of a tree is its fruit, the purpose of Torah study is
action, mitzvos (Even Shelaimah). Rabbi Soloveitchik was Litvish, but he was
his own man. He had such a grasp on the Talmud and hashkafa that he transcended
the contemporary weltanschauung. He wasn't really part of the contemporary
Yeshiva world in the sense of the Yeshiva world club. He was more a throwback
to the Litvacks of old. As I have said, when I'm talking here, when I
expressing my discomfort with Litvish things, I'm not talking about the
old-time Litvish approach to life but the new one, the New York-Israeli one.
The interaction the Sepharidic man
had with the Rebbe lasted about thirty seconds. Most of the time consisted of a
Chabad rabbi explaining the question on behalf of this man. The Rebbe listened
patiently as he always does. His answer took about 10 seconds, yet it helped to
resolve a decades long struggle for me. I had seen Rabbi Soloveitchik's comment
some years ago and that was helpful too. But I know that the Rebbe was
referring to both the intellectual and mystical influence of Torah. The latter
part is important for me too.
Mitzvos are always very important in
Chabad thought:
This week’s Torah reading begins Vihayah eikev tishmayun,
“And it shall come to pass after you heed,” and continues enumerating generous
Divine blessings which the Jews will receive for their observance of the Torah
and its mitzvos.
Our Sages note that the word eikev also means “heel,” and
explain that this is a reference to mitzvos which a person “tramples with his
heel,” i.e., those mitzvos which are not obviously important, but rather are
inconspicuously embedded into the fabric of our lives. Keeping these mitzvos warrants
G‑d’s bountiful blessings.
When a person observes mitzvos that are obviously important,
his commitment is not necessarily that internalized. The importance of the
mitzvos does not allow him to ignore them. From the outset, he accepts it as a
given that he will observe these precepts. As such, his observance is not that
involving an undertaking for him. He is doing what he is expected to do.
When, however, a person observes mitzvos that can be
“trampled with our heels,” he shows an extra measure of devotion. By nature,
these mitzvos would be ignored; there is no natural tendency pushing him to
observe them. Their observance requires him to summon up an extra measure of
commitment that enables him to go beyond his natural inclination. Making this additional
effort evokes an extra measure of Divine favor and brings the manifold
blessings the Torah mentions. (Keeping In Touch - Vol. 1: Eikev, Based on the
teachings of the Lubavitcher Rebbe )
You
hear this kind of thought sometimes in the Yeshivist world, but in Chabad, it's
ubiquitous.
I could cite many places where the
Lubavitcher Rebbe talks about other mitzvos along with Torah. And it's not just
him. The Chabad Rebbes have always done this. Let's start with the Baal HaTanya
(elucidated by Rabbi Yosef Wineberg):
איך היות כל עיקר עבודת ה׳ בעתים הללו, בעקבות משיחא, היא עבודת הצדקה
how in these times, when the
approaching footsteps of Mashiach are close upon us, the principal service of G‑d
is the service of charity.
כמו שאמרו רז״ל: אין ישראל נגאלין אלא בצדקה
As our Sages, of blessed memory,
said: “Israel will be redeemed only through charity.”
ולא אמרו רז״ל: תלמוד תורה שקול כנגד גמילות חסדים
Our Sages, of blessed memory, did
not say that the study of Torah is equivalent to the performance of acts of
lovingkindness,
[The Mishnah states in Peah: “The
study of Torah is equivalent to them all,” i.e., to all the mitzvot previously
enumerated in the Mishnah, and these include gemilut chassadim, the performance
of acts of lovingkindness,]
אלא בימיהם
except in their own days.
שתלמוד
תורה היה עיקר העבודה אצלם, ועל כן היו חכמים גדולים, תנאים ואמוראים
For with them the principal area
of divine service was the study of the Torah, which is why at that time there
were great scholars: tannaim and amoraim.
מה שאין כן בעקבות משיחא
However, in a time when the
approaching footsteps of Mashiach are close upon us,
שנפלה סוכת דוד עד בחינת רגלים ועקביים, שהיא בחינת עשיה
as “the Sukkah of David has
fallen” to a level of “feet” and “heels”, i.e., to the level of Asiyah,
[I.e., the Sefirah called Malchut
of Atzilut, the Shechinah that vests itself in the lower Worlds of Beriah,
Yetzirah and Asiyah — also known as the “Sukkah of David,” for David, as the
King of Israel, was a merkavah to Malchut of Atzilut — has fallen to the lowest
level of Asiyah.]
אין דרך לדבקה בה באמת
there is no way of truly cleaving
unto it, i.e., to the Shechinah,
ולהפכא
חשוכא לנהורא דילה
and transforming the darkness of
the world into its light,
כי אם בבחינת עשיה גם כן
except through a corresponding
category of action, and not through intellect and speech alone, as in Torah
study,
שהיא מעשה הצדקה
namely, the act of charity.
[But why is charity unique among
all the many commandments that involve action?]
כידוע למשכילים, שבחינת עשיה באלקות היא בחינת השפעת והמשכת החיות למטה מטה, למאן דלית ליה מגרמיה כלום
As is known to the scholarly,
“action” with reference to Divinity is the diffusion and downward flow of
vitality to the lowest depths — to him who has nothing of his own.
[Among the currents of Divine
influence that descend into the various worlds, there are those that are called
“thought” and “speech”. The flow of vitality to the very lowest level — to the
World of Asiyah, where G‑dliness is not at all manifest — is called “action”.
The act of giving tzedakah thus
truly corresponds to the spiritual level of Asiyah, inasmuch as it too provides
beneficence to one “who has nothing of his own.”]
וכל הזובח את יצרו בזה
And whoever sacrifices his impulse
in this respect, i.e., with respect to charity,
ופותח ידו ולבבו
and opens his hand and heart,
אתכפיא
סטרא אחרא
[thereby] causes “the other [i.e.,
evil] side” of the universe to be subjugated,
ומהפך חשוכא לאור ה׳ יתברך, השוכן עלינו בבחינת עשיה בעקבות משיחא
and “converts the darkness into
the light” of G‑d, blessed be He, Who, in the time when the footsteps of
Mashiach are close upon us, dwells over us in a state of action;
ויזכה לראות עין בעין, בשוב ה׳ ציון כו׳
moreover, he will merit to “behold
Eye to eye, G‑d returning to Zion....”
[At that time the physical eye,
though yet retaining its physicality, will behold G‑dliness as it is beheld by
the Supernal Eye. Thus, within the physicality of the World of Asiyah, there
will be revealed the level of certainty in spiritual perception which is called
vision — a level that far surpasses the furthest attainments of the intellect.]
Sometimes
I tell myself that the Yeshivist approach could be that today we are so low
that we don't gain as much by focusing on the mitzvos. We get lost in that. We
get more bang for the buck by focusing on a single thing, Torah. The Tanya is
saying that Torah study is very important, but in our times we actually get
more bang from tzedukah. It is possible that the Tanya's argument is that Torah
is for connecting to Hashem and tzedukah is for a Tikun and today we need a
Tikun. I remember in yeshiva telling the dean that I wanted to get involved in
chesed projects, but he balked at the whole idea.
The
Tanya talks plenty about the importance of Torah learning. It says Torah study
is food for the soul whereas mitzvos are garments. However, it also says that
physical mitzvos purify the goof and the physical world, making it a dwelling
place for Hashem, which is the purpose of life.
As our Sages have said, “When even one person applies himself
diligently to Torah study, the Shechinah is with him,” meaning, in this case,
that the Shechinah rests upon his divine soul, and upon its faculties of
thought and speech which are engaged in the mental and oral study of the Torah.
However, in order to draw the light and radiation of the Shechinah upon his
body and animal soul as well, i.e., upon the vitalizing soul actually clothed
in the body and providing for it a corporeal life-force, one must fulfill the
practical mitzvot (i.e., commandments involving the faculty of action), which
are performed with the body itself. In this way the actual power of the body
engaged in this act e.g., when one dons Tefillin, it is the physical strength
in his arm that impels the motions that constitute the fulfillment of the
mitzvah; and therefore this bodily power is absorbed in the Divine light and
Will, and merges with it in perfect unity. (Tanya 35)
So
study has its advantages and mitzvos have their advantages. This is balanced in
my view.
Since
the Alter Rebbe is the starting point for Chabad Chassidus, it shouldn't be
surprising to hear an emphasis on mitzvos throughout Chabad literature. For
example, the 7th Rebbe says that Aharon's sons died because they
approached G-d from pure spirit and did not tie it back to physical acts as
symbolized by their entering the Holy of Holies, not wearing all the proper
garments (mitzvos are garments of the soul), and not marrying or having
children. He says as well:
The sages teach us that, in the absence of the holy Temple,
someone who studies the laws of a given sacrifice is considered as if he had
offered it up. But if the study of the laws of a sacrifice accomplishes the
same thing as offering it up, why should we bother with the sacrifice itself,
even when the Temple will be rebuilt?
The difference between the “virtual” sacrifice and the
actual one is their effect on the world. While a sacrifice “offered up” by
studying its laws elevates the person, it does not elevate the world around
him. Only the physical sacrifice, which includes all aspects of creation –
human, animal, vegetable, and mineral – elevates the world at large.
Thus, we should always seek a practical, tangible way to
apply the spiritual inspiration or insight we garner, in order for it to affect
and elevate not merely ourselves, but the entire world. (Fifth Reading:
Leviticus 8:14–21, Translated and Adapted by Moshe Wisnefsky)
Tell
me who in the Yeshivist world talks like this? Even Rabbi Avigdor Miller who
talks about a lot about Yiras Shemayim and middos mostly discusses the
importance of the mind, the intellect. As he said, “But for those who know that
they’re in this world for one purpose only, to achieve perfection of the mind,
so there’s nothing better than living under the ananei kavod.” (Toras Avigdor,
“His Clouds of Glory.”) With Chabad all of it matters, thought, speech, and
action, the mind, the emotions, and the body. It is a holistic system.
We
see it again here:
[Moses said,] “[G‑d] made [the Jewish people] surround Him
[by commanding them to camp around the Tabernacle].” Deuteronomy 32:10
By studying the Torah regularly, we construct a
“Tabernacle,” i.e., a dwelling for G‑d, in our personal lives. By commanding
the Jewish people to encamp around the Tabernacle, G‑d teaches us that we
should center our lives around this inner sanctuary. The innermost point of the
Tabernacle was the Ark, which housed the Tablets of the Covenant, i.e., the
Torah. When the Torah is the focal point around which our lives revolve, it can
positively affect all facets of our lives, as it is meant to. Furthermore, once
the Torah is illuminating and influencing our lives as it is meant to, its
influence can spread still further outward, enlightening and refining all
humanity and the entire world. (Lubavitcher Rebbe, Daily Wisdom, p. 429).
Here
you have a Yeshivist message (study Torah), a Hirschian message (refine
humanity), and a Chassidic one (make the world a dwelling place for Hashem).
The Rebbe combines them all for a paragraph statement that I'd be more than
happy to make the theme of my life.
This Shabbos while giving divrei
Torah to the family, I opted for a little variety and pulled down two Yeshivist
books. One was a book on the parsha. I opened it to a random story told by a
famous rabbinical figure, described as a gaon, from the prior century about how
he was traveling and got tired and instructed the driver to find the rabbi's
house in the nearest town. The rabbi was frightened to see this important
figure at his doorway but was calmed when told that he just needed a place to
stay. The rabbi was hospitable “but not
particularly learned to put it politely.” The gaon tried to sleep but overheard
the commotion as two men came with a monetary dispute. The gaon wondered how
the this not-so-learned rabbi could possibly solve their problem as it appeared
to be a complex one. However, he made a correct ruling. The gaon was amazed. He
asked for the basis of the decision. The rabbi opened a book to a commentary on
the Shulchan Aruch. He completely misread the commentary, but it still led him
to the correct ruling. The gaon marveled at the siata d'shemaya that even an
ordinary rabbi gets when giving posuk, that he didn't grasp the complexities
but was still led to the right pesak.
I didn't enjoy the story. First of
all, this gaon seemed to speak from a sense of self-importance, commenting on
the rabbi's fear when he, an important person, appeared at his door. It's one
thing if somebody else tells the story, but it was the man telling the story
about himself. And this little piece of it was not relevant to the eventual
message. He could easily have skipped it.
Second of all, the first observation about the rabbi was that he wasn't
very learned because again, that is everything according to the Yeshivist
perspective. Why say such a thing about a Jew and one to whom you owed hakaras
hatov? Third of all, there was the ending which promoted the rabbinical class
in general, that even an ignorant rabbi provides the right answer. This seems
to contradict the attitude conveyed throughout the tale that one's level of
learning is the most important thing in life. If all rabbis are led to the
right answer, why is being a gaon so important? The message could have been
given without these uncomfortable details, how he once saw a rabbi be led to
the right answer even though he didn't understand the issues fully. Of course,
I don't know how this gadol actually told the story over. I'm getting the
account from the writer of this book who may have embellished in the name of
the gadol. But that still tells you about the mentality in the Yeshivist world,
that the writer wouldn't find it odd that the gadol would talk in such a
manner.
I closed that book and opened the
other, which was a book of biographies of Litivsh gadolim. I opened to a random
story of how this one very famous gadol of about thirty years ago preferred the
bus to a car. In a car, he had to talk to the driver and answer his questions.
In a bus he was left alone to contemplate his shiur clali.
The story bothered me too. A bus is
way less convenient than a car. Still, it so annoyed him to be in a car with a
baal habayis that he'd opt for the inconvenience. Maybe baal habayim need the
contact with him. Maybe Hashem arranges it that way. Where was the sense of
hashgacha pratis? And in a bus, couldn't he think about Hashem maybe, or chesed
ideas, or cheshbon hanefesh, why just the shiur clali? And why didn't he prefer
a bus so he could be around yidden and see them with their families in a
natural environment (not on artificial behavior in front of the gadol),
something he probably doesn't see so often. Where was the Ahavas Yisroel? I
once heard about a Sephardic rav in North Africa who used to walk through the
marketplace so he could get to know the people and be in a better position to
poskin for them. That story I liked.
In both of these Yeshivist stories
you can feel the condescension and disdain for the non-gadol. Not everybody is
going to have perfect Ahavas Yisroel, but in these cases we are talking about
men considered by many to be THE gadolei hador of their respective eras. Moshe
Rabbeinu loved the people. He asked to be written out of the book if Hashem did
not grant forgiveness to the people. I know of stories of chesed by these very
significant men, but still as the leaders of their respective generations, I am
a little surprised, a little confused by their comments.
These stories of Litvacks were
selected randomly. I just opened the books. I was looking for some
inspirational material for the Shabbos table and got these tales of Torah,
Torah, Torah. They speak volumes, conveying the idea that “Nothing else
matters” but Torah study. This is ubiquitous in Yeshivist hashkgafa. When you
take a break from Gemara lomdus you get hashkafa about the importance of Gemara
lomdus. It's a closed loop. Whenever I hear Yeshivist hashkafa about Torah
study I think why are we talking about doing the thing, let's just do the
thing? But that leaves me feeling kind of empty, because where's Hashem? I had
thought the Gemara lomdus would lead me to Hashem, but it led me back to Gemara
lomdus. I feel tricked.
The idea of “nothing else matters” is
not as common as the phrase “Talmud Torah k'neged kulam,” but lately it's
getting lots of airplay. I saw recently two several hespid articles that had
the approach of nothing else matters. I found them laying about a Yeshivist
shul, again sort of random selections. The first was actually entitled “Nothing
else mattered.” It talked about how a certain contemporary gadol cared about
nothing other than Torah study. All he ever wanted to do was get back to his
learning. Hashem was never mentioned. Klal Yisroel was never mentioned. The
other article was pretty much the same, but it did mention chesed once or
twice. Those references came late in the articles and seemed sort of token. I
felt uncomfortable as I read these articles and soiled afterward. This is
pretty much how Yeshivist biographies read. It's Torah, Torah, Torah plus a few
examples of good middos and a little bit of chesed.
Some more examples:
My zaide grew up in Tzitivyan, a shtetel in Lithuania, in
the home of my elter zaide, Rav Yaakov [name redacted by author of this essay].
There was nothing there besides a few chickens and a blatt Gemara. Chashivus
for Torah was in the air he breathed, and it became part and parcel of his
being. He learned under the gedolim of Telshe, and he vividly recalled the
fiery shmuessen of the Telzer rov, Rav Avrohom Yitzchok Bloch. (Yated Ne'eman,
April 11, 2018)
This
article does mention that its subject did lots of chesed, but it doesn't
mention mitzvos and it mentions Hashem only once. And it of course it starts
off by talking about chashivus for Torah, gadolim, and there being nothing but
the blatt Gemara.
In
this example, Yehoshua bin Nun is portrayed as living only for Torah.
The level of sacrificing for Torah is contingent on one’s
degree of self-negation. The fact that Yehoshua had unceasingly been associated
with Moshe from the very beginning was an indication that nothing else mattered
in his life other than Torah. This is only possible when one totally negates
his own aspirations. (www.yadavnow.com)
Interesting.
Didn't Hashem matter? Didn't Klal Yisroel matter? Did mitzvos matter? When they
write that only Torah matters are they implying that mitzvos matter without
specifying so? I try to tell myself that's what they are doing, but it really
doesn't seem to be the case.
The
biography of Vichna Kaplan tells the incredible story of how Boruch and Vichna
Kaplan started the American Beis Yaakov movement. They were amazing people who
saved so many souls. But the biography says this:
Reb Boruch always viewed full-time learning as the greatest
privilege and his greatest loss. Perhaps that is why time was always so precious
to him. He craved every minute he could run back to his Gemara, but if he had
to be busy with Bais Yaakov, he wanted every minute to count. (p. 482)
You read this and think, how sad that
he had to be involved with Bais Yaakov. Nebech. I'm not saying that Reb Boruch
felt this way, but the author of the book portrays it that way.
Another example:
Rav Gifter was the living embodiment of Torah. Whether he
was speaking in learning with his talmidim or asking a young child what verse
he had learned that day, his interest was Torah. He was completely oblivious to
everything else; he was one with the Torah. (Rav Gifter, p. 107)
From what I hear about Rav Gifter, he
was engaged in all kinds of activities and certainly cared about cavod
shemayim. He was one with Hashem too. However, the author of the biography
reached into a bag of Yeshivist cliches for this portrayal that I don't find
flattering. He is made to sound like a college professor. Should a person be
oblivious to everything but study? What about people? The author didn't invent
the cliches. They are everywhere in Litivsh culture. Likewise, there are reams
of stories like these. I found these in minutes.
Compare these Yeshivist tales to
Chassidic biographies where you get a much deeper sense of what the person is
about, his life story, how he came to Chassidus in many cases, about dedication
to Hashem, Klal Yisroel, and mitzvos, and interesting incidents from his life
that speak very much of hashgacha pratis and devotion to serving Hashem. It's all
good. It's not that nebech all this happened at the expense of Gemara study.
The Shalom Atzvon biographies of Chabad Rebbes are full of tales of their
adventures, battles with governments, dealings with their chassidim, fights
with misnagdim, building of communities. The biography of German Jewish Rav
Samson Raphael Hirsch has this too, but he was not a Litvack and the book was
written by a Yekke based on research from another Yekke. Chabad has many
biographies of distinguished Chassidim like Reb Pinchas Reizes and Shmuel
Munkis. They are not necessarily the greatest of scholars or even if they were
the books don't focus exclusively on that. The biography of the Rivnitzer Rebbe
also weaves a whole story of his life and his many deeds.
Interestingly, when Litvacks write
biographies of Chassidic Rebbes they often make them sound like Litvacks, as we
find for example with Artscroll or Feldheim publishers. In Their Shadow, Volume
III, has a biography of the Ozhrover Rebbe.
In addition to being a distinguished and admired admor, the
Ozhrover Rebbe, Rav Moshe Yechiel Epstein, was renowned as an outstanding
Talmid Chochom. He possessed a phenomenal memory and was literally 'a limed pit
that doesn't lost a drop' (Avos 2:8). He was, as Rav Aharon Kotler put it, 'wholly
filled to overflowing with Torah. And this description is acording to Rav
Aharon's understanding of the terms, not our own!
The Rebbe was completely blind in one eye and only had
approximately ten percent vision in his other eye. Therefore, the numerous
volumes of his sefarim (some thirty in all) – Eish Dos and Be'er Moshe,
covering every part of the Torah – were written entirely from memory. When the
passages from the Gemara and Zohar that the Rebbe quoted were checked with the
originals, his quotes were found to be word perfect.
This is how the biography begins! We
hear of his genius, his phenomenal memory. Then it continues by telling a story
of how the Rebbe at a family gathering heard a leading rav quote a puzzling
passage from the Yerushalmi. After leaving, the Rebbe remarked to his companion
Rav Yisroel Katz how no such Yerushalmi exists. A Rav Shachori commented, “That
the Rebbe categorically stated that no such passage exists in the Yerushalmi
did not surprise me because the knew the entire Yerushalmi. There was nothing
new in that. The novelty lay in his restraint, in the fact that he didn't
challenge the speaker immediately, in order to avoid embarrassing him.” So it
took a page and a half, but we finally hear about something other than Torah
genius. We heard something about middos; although what we heard was said in the
context of Torah genius.
The biography continues:
Whenever a new volume of one of his sefarim was published he
was in a state of great joy and would say, “I feel as though I'm walking my
daughter to the chuppah.' When his first sefer, Be'er Moshe on the Torah, was
published, the heads of Yeshivas Chayei Olam in Yerushalayim arranged a
reception in the Rebbe's honor, in which most of the gedolei ha-Torah and
admorim participated. I also had the privilege of being a guest at this event,
which took place on the eight of MarCheshvan 5725/1964.
The evening was devoted to the theme of honoring Torah. The
Rebbe revealed that he had consented to the even because it increased the
Torah's honor. “Everyone is olligated to honor the Torah,” he added, “even if
the Torah I question is his own – his own original interpretations.
Following the distinguished guests' blessings, the Rebbe
delivered a lengthy discourse. The wondrous insights he repeated displayed both
incisive thinking and thorough knowledge covering the length and breadth of
Shas. He spoke entirely from memory; as mentioned, he was virtually blind.
The audience was profoundly impressed. They were beside
themselves as they listened to the Rebbe smoothly deliver array after array of
novel ideas covering topics in halacha, aggadah, Kabbalah and chassidic
teachings, as effortlessly as thought he were reading it all out from prepared
notes.
We
are now two pages into this biography of a Chassidic rebbe and we have heard
nothing about his chassidim. We have heard nothing about his Yiras Shemayim
other than one moment of restraint when he didn't correct the other scholar. We
have heard nothing about Hashem. We aren't even hearing about diligence in
study. We just keep hearing about his genius, which Hashem, Who hasn't been
mentioned, blessed him with. It could be a biography of chess master Bobby
Fisher. The story goes that when he was in Iceland for a tournament, he stayed
at the house of some Icelanders who went out for the evening. When they
returned home, he gave them a lengthy phone message in perfect Icelandic, a
language he didn't speak. However, his memory was so good, he remembered all
the words without understanding them.
There
are people like this in the world, some are Torah scholars, some are secular
Jews, some are goyim. There are people who can tell you on the spot the product
of 4,457 x 1.2875. I used to work with a guy, a gentile WASP, who was so
brilliant, we used to call him Copernicus. He had such a memory. He was an
attorney specializing in tax law. And tax law is as over-sized as the
government that is funded by taxes. He seemed to know every law. And he seemed
to know almost as much about computer programming, politics, and all kinds of
other things. When I told him I was moving to Israel he said, are you going
under the Law of Return? I know Jews that never heard of the Law of Return. This
guy was amazing. I worked with a few goyim whose minds amazed me. It is goyim
who win 80% of Nobel Prizes and invented things like airplanes and discovered
the DNA helix. But so what? That's not holiness. I believe there's a Chazal
that says Klal Yisroel wasn't chosen because we are the most brilliant of
peoples. That's not the essence of what we are about. So why is this biography
talking about nothing else. It continues for four pages, the entire first
chapter is about the Rebbe's genius. Then, like with any good Yeshivist
biography, it offers a few token words about his good middos.
Here's
how the Shalom Avtzon biography on the Alter Rebbe begins:
Once, while the Alter Rebbe was at home immersed in his
learning, he heard cries of a baby. Interrupting his learning, he went down the
stairs and lovingly picked up his grandchild, who had fallen out of his crib.
Holding the infant until his cries subsided, he placed him back in the crib and
rocked him gently for a short while until the baby fell back asleep.
The
story continues to say how the Rebbe “gently rebuked” his son for being so
engrossed in his learning that he didn't hear the baby. “One must never be so
immersed in his studies that he does not hear the cry of a child,” the Rebbe
said.
The
story of Reb Pinchas Reizes begins as follows: “Once, the Alter Rebbe chose his
close disciple, Reb Pinchas for the very important mission of collecting money
for the needy of Eretz Yisroel and making sure it was delivered there.” And
then hear an interesting account of his journey. It is filled with interesting
characters, many of then tzadickim, and a sense of hashgacha pratis at every
turn. These Chabad biographies are like a different genre from Yeshivist
biographies, even biographies about Chassidic Rebbes written by Litvacks. From
the Chassidic biographies, you get a sense that there are 613 mitzvos. From the
Yeshivist ones, there appears to be only one. In commenting on Zionism, Rav
Avigdor Miller said:
What should be our attitude toward Zionism? Answer, by this
time, I think that our people know the answer, but to repeat. Zionism is a
substitute for Judaism. It would be as saying, if someone began a movement
Tefillinism or Sukkaism. Everybody who emphases one thing is already under
suspicion that he does not belong to the Torah Jews. Because the Torah is
composed of taryag mitzvos and when one chooses a single mitzvah and makes a
big fuss about it then we suspect him of intending to do away with the rest.
And that's exactly what Zionism is. It s an attempt to substitute nationalism
for everything else, for mitzvos, for Torah, and even for God (Rav Avigdor
Miller Pictures in the Mind, 040, 1:30:39)
This should be put the Litvacks under
suspicion whenever they utter the phrase “nothing else mattered.” You can't
live for one mitzvah.
It's quite tedious dealing with
anyone with a one-track mind. Religious Zionists in Israel are notorious for
their one-track mind. Recently, I stopped a local rabbi on the street because I
knew him to be a student of Rabbi Soloveitchik. I said that to him, I heard you
were a student of Rabbi Soloveitchik. I wanted to talk about him. This rabbi
moved the conversation to something Zionistic. 'How long have you lived here?
How has it gone? The Gemara says three things are achieved only via
difficultly.' Blah, blah, blah. We never talked about Rabbi Soloveitchik.
Yesterday, I saw a shiva sign and thought to attend, even though I didn't know
the deceased. His son talked about the father a bit and seemed quite shaken at
the man's death. Yet, he quickly shifted the conversation to something
Zionistic, that the world is unsafe for Jews and we must all move to Israel.
Even at a shiva, this is the topic for Zionists.
With Yeshivists, the topic is Torah
study. Recently, my neighbor, a rabbi, gave me a lift to a chassinah. What are
you doing these days he said. I have long stopped answering that question with Yeshivist
rabbis because I have found that generally they are probing how much money I
have. You see the frown on their faces if you say something like “working for
the city.” They want to hear something about real estate empires and hedge funds. “Mitzvos,” I said.
“Torah and mitzvos,” he countered. Mitzvos weren't enough for him. He couldn't leave my answer alone. He had to
argue, and he had to stress Torah as if referencing mitzvos wasn't enough. And
if I had said “Torah.” would have said “Torah and mitzvos”? Not bloody likely.
In Chabad literature, it is standard
to talk always about Torah and mitzvos together. Example from a recent HaYom
Yom, which is a book of writings of the 6th Rebbe:
From my father's guiding instructions: Keep away - to the
ultimate degree - from a campaign of attack. Not because we lack the means of
prevailing or because of timorousness, but because we must consecrate all our
strength exclusively to strengthening our own structure, the edifice of Torah
and mitzvot performed in holiness and purity. To this we must devote ourselves
utterly, with actual mesirat nefesh,1 not merely with potential mesirat nefesh.
Elul 14
Another
example, from a letter by the 7th Rebbe:
I will conclude with a blessing
that you should have long days and good years, the simple meaning of which is twofold: that you should have
many, long healthy years, and in addition, that your years should be truly
good and filled with goodness – and
there is no real goodness except for the Torah and its commandments. (I
Believe, p. 282.)
And
again:
Although there are specific times when it is appropriate for
a Jew to feel bitterness, and especially when the purpose of the emotion is to
spur him onwards towards a greater commitment to Torah and mitzvos, sadness
should be avoided completely because it brings a person to a state of despair,
lack of energy and initiative, etc. (I Believe, p. 283)
In
Chabad thought, they are inseparable, Torah AND Commandments.
Another
example from Chabad rabbi Jacob Immanuel Schochet:
Thus it is said, "The Holy One, blessed be He, desired
-lezakot- the people of Israel, and therefore He gave them Torah and mitzvot in
abundance."
The term -lezakot- means to refine and purify.
The implication is that there is a refinement and
purification of Israel's material reality so that it will be able to become
attached and joined to holiness. This is indeed suggested by the term mitzvah -
mitzvot, which is an idiom of tzavta attachment, union. This principle is
alluded in the saying of "A mitzvah brings about a mitzvah: doing a
mitzvah brings about, and leads to, tzavta - attachment and conjunction, while
"An aveirah (transgression) brings about an aveirah," i.e.,
overstepping, to pass beyond, and to be separated from the Creator.
By means of Torah and mitzvot, therefore, man, the
prospective recipient renders himself into a proper receptacle. Thus he becomes
like a channel or conduit for the supernal `spring' from which the beneficent
abundance flows forth to that individual and to the whole world. (Chassidic
Dimensions)
There
it is again, Torah AND mitzvot.
How
many times have you heard a Yeshivist rabbi say that the purpose of life is
Torah learning? I have heard it many times. Nobody blinks if you say that. But
it seems to me that the notion stands in stark contrast to the Chabad emphasis
on Torah AND mitzvos. Sometimes you'll hear Yeshivists say that yiras shemayim
is the goal of life, but they don't talk about mitzvos so much. Rav Yaakov
Weinberg of Yeshivas Ner Yisroel said the purpose is to serve Hashem. That
implies mitzvos. But he wasn’t exactly fully Yeshivist as he came from Stolin
Chassidim. Nevertheless, there's a dominant view in the Yeshivist world today
that learning is everything. It's a one-track mind. Take this for example:
“And Moshe went, and he spoke the following words to all
Yisroel” (31:1) Why does the Torah tell us that Moshe went, and where did he go
to? Targum Yonoson says that he went to
the Beis Hamedrash tent before going to speak to the nation. Moshe knew that this would be his
last day (see Rashi on 31:2). Instead of
spending time on the day of his death with his family, Moshe Rabbenu
went to the Beis Hamedrash to learn Torah.
This teaches us that every second that we still have life in our nostrils should be exploited for learning
Torah, because life cannot be considered life
without it.
That's
from Rav Moshe Sternbuch. I like Rav Sternbuch. I have learned some good stuff
from his parsha material. I have met him a few times. He is impressive. But I
don't understand this. I would sooner read the posuk as saying that Moshe spent
his final moments attending to the people, being a rebbe and a leader. He spent
his final moments doing chesed, not learning Torah.
I believe even the Zionistic
one-track thinking comes from the Yeshivist background of most Zionists. Their
minds were already converted to pounding out one message. They just converted
it from Torah to Zionism. The lack of emphases on bitachon also plays well into
the heretical Zionist notions of taking the land by force and identification
with a political state.
In the contemporary Litvish world,
yiras shemayim seems to have taken a backseat in many quarters. Sometimes, it
seems to not be in the car at all. The goal always is to be a gaon. I hear this
everywhere. I heard a mashgiach tell a father whose son the mashgiach was
recruiting “Don't you want him to be a gadol?” He could have said, “Don't you
want him to be a yiras shemayim?” Isn't that what Koheles describes as the
purpose of life: “The sum of the matter is to fear God and keep his
commandments. That is the sum of the man.” And what are the chances that he was
going to be a gadol? The posuk says “it is not across the oceans”. In other
words, what is being asked of you isn't ridiculous, isn't unreachable. How many
can become gadolim, particularly if the title is a relative thing, meaning only
the top will be called that. By definition, most will fail. I would have been
less annoyed if he had said, “Don't you want him to be a talmid chochom?”
As I have said, not every Litvack is
guilty of this. For example, Rabbi Avigdor Miller said:
Q: If studying Hashem's creation and the emunah is such an
important subject, why isn't it studied in the high schools, the mesivtas,
today?
But today the boys
who are put into mesivta don't know anything; they know nothing about emunah,
and therefore certainly they're losing out.
It's very important that the Chovos Halevavos, Sha'ar Habechinah should
be taught today. And I would give a suggestion. Instead of the English
Departments of the high schools teaching goyishe things – and very many Jewish
boys and girls are ruined in the high school department of the yeshivos and
this I can tell you from first-hand experience; I happen to know that it's true
– if the mesivtas meant business, they could utilize the high schools to teach
them emunah. And the boys and girls would come to such a strong faith in
Hakodosh Boruch Hu that the high school could even be more powerful in shaping
their minds and characters than anything else could be; it's a big opportunity
that's going lost. TAPE # 407 (May 1982)
But Rabbi Miller is a rare voice on
this matter. He is telling you that in so many words. He is saying people used
to learn about yiras shemayim and they need to start again. We'll note that
Rabbi Miller as a boy had a Chabad melamed.
I mentioned earlier a video of the
Lubavitcher Rebbe. In the subsequent footage from the aforementioned video,
Rabbi Shlomo Riskin, a Yeshivist Dati Leumi rabbi, asked the Rebbe to bless his
son to be a scholar and to be observant. The Rebbe said that he should also be
a yiras shemayim. To the Rebbe, it is not acceptable to not ask for that too.
I went last year to a yeshiva dinner
where nothing but Talmud Torah was mentioned over the course of three hours.
Hashem wasn't mentioned. Mitzvos weren't mentioned. Yiras shemayim wasn't
mentioned. The only thing mentioned was learning, the greatness of learning and
of making donations to support learning. This is common today. I went recently
to a bar mitzvah where the father talked at length with pride about how his son
was schteiging in learning. I remember thinking, is this a bar gemara or a bar
mitzvah? So just as the Rebbe calmed me
by giving a holistic reading of the phrase “Talmud Torah k'eged kulam,” here he
saved the day again by stressing the importance of yiras shemayim, by not
allowing the encounter with Rabbi Riskin to pass without stressing it. One of
the Yeshivist criticisms of Chabad (more on that in a bit) is that Chabad is
all caught up with the Rebbe. Well, the Rebbe points us to God. Yeshivist
rabbis generally stress Torah and gadolim.
I received an email recently from a
seminary for baalei teshuva. Here was the bulk of the message:
Thanks to you, our students are having profound experiences
that are charting the direction of their lives. They are:
Gaining real skills to learn Torah independently from our
world-class Torah educators
Strengthening their connection to the rich history, people,
and agriculture inherent only in Eretz Yisrael.
Accessing balanced spiritual guidance that will support them
as they build their families, their careers, and their communities
There is no reference to Hashem
either here or in the entire email. There is no reference to mitzvos. This is a
school for women who were raised without mitzvos. Now they are keeping mitzvos.
But mitzvos are not mentioned. The letter mentions only Torah learning (again,
this is a school for women who are not commanded in Torah study), Eretz
Yisroel, and some vague reference to spirituality that sounded new age in its
absence of referencing God. I argue that this attitude is a result of the
contemporary Litvish perspective, which has replaced God with Torah study,
along with a bit of Zionism which has replaced God with land and state.
The contemporary Litvish mentality is
why so many Litvish rabbis gave me such a hard time when I wanted to leave
yeshiva. I was thirty, penniless, unmarried, and unable to concentrate on my
studies at all. It was time to leave and to get a job so I could get a wife.
But to them, life is Torah study. So how could you leave yeshiva for any
reason? I found that I just as well could have consulted a spreadsheet as talk
to Yeshivist rabbanim about almost anything. The answer to everything is to
study more Torah. I know a guy who was really struggling with Orthodox Judaism
as well as his mental health. He went to see a rabbi/counselor who told him, “I
think you need to study more Torah.” That cost him $50. Magical, magical.
Studying Torah would magically change him. It didn't. There's a famous Jewish
writer Shalom Auslander. He has written several very humorous books about the
pain he endured as a bochur in Monsey. It is clear from his writing that what
the young man needed was a wife and a writing job. What did his family do, they
sent him to Eretz Yisroel to study Gemara. That's all you need. That fixes
everything. It didn't work. He is completely off the derech today and talks
publicly against religious Judaism.
I found when speaking to Yeshivist
rabbanim about life decisions that awareness of hashgacha pratis didn't factor
much into the thinking of the ones I talked to. Neither did personal
predilections or instincts fit in. I was once flown to Los Angeles along with
my entire yeshiva by a wealthy Sephardi man who wanted us to start a night
learning program there. Our presence was supposed to kick this off. I liked LA.
I always wanted to live in California. The laid back atmosphere there is better for me. I wasn't so aware of that at the time, but I
did want to stay. Being a good little boy, I called up a Yeshivist rabbi and
asked for his opinion. He said, you must always stay away from tuma and Los
Angeles is “tuma par excellence.” He didn't asked me why I wanted to be there.
He didn't factor in that I was already there, that Hashem had arranged this
highly unusual thing of flying a yeshiva out there and giving me a month to
make the arrangements for moving. Hashgacha pratis didn't matter. What I wanted
didn't matter. Only his dogma mattered. As it turns out there's lots of Chabad
out there and I might have gotten involved with Chabad twenty years before I
actually did, after much suffering. Not only that, but his logic made no sense
either as New York has just as much tuma as Los Angeles. LA has Hollywood and
all that superficiality, but NY has Wall St. and Madison Avenue and all kinds
of nonsense of its own. I was in Cleveland once and I pointed out to my friend
all the people at the table who were likely from Cleveland and all the ones who
were likely from New York. I based this strictly by the looks on their faces.
The ones from the Midwest seemed peaceful, wholesome, and happy. The ones from
New York seemed crazed. Incidentally, I wanted to move to Cleveland and called
a Yeshivist Rav about that. He said, you should want to be in a place that's
growing, which he said Cleveland wasn't. NY was, he said. I called him while
driving back from Cleveland. So once again, a Yeshivist Rav didn't take into
account my interests or hashgacha pratis. He just spouted some idea in his
head. As it turns out that idea was as off the mark as the other rabbi's idea
about Los Angeles was for Cleveland has grown tremendously since that phone
call.
I also once talked to a rabbi about
moving to France as I had a shiduch opportunity there. He said you can't make
any money in France. In NY, you can make big money. This rabbi was born and
raised in New York. He talked again and again about money. Money, money, money.
Why so much talk about money? Part of
it is New York culture. There's an old expression in Boston they ask you where
you went to school. In Philadelphia they ask you whose your family? In New York
they ask you how much money you have. Indeed NY has its own tuma. But also, you
need money to study Torah full-time. The son of a very famous gadol told a
group I was in that earning a living is nothing but a curse. There was no
concept of contributing to the world, or the chochmah of the profession, or of
releasing sparks of holiness by engaging in work. Rather, it was a curse.
That's all. Isn't that their view on anything that's not Torah study? Sometimes,
Yeshivists will say work is to make money to support yeshivas. And rarer still
they'll say it's a chance to make a kiddush Hashem. Frankly, that can't be the
kavanah all day long. You have to be into the thing itself. With the Yeshivist attitude, there's no way
to do that. But you can make money to support yeshivas. Well this leads to
greed.
Gemara, gelt, and guilt. That's how I
experienced the yeshiva world. And by Gemara, I mean just a few pages of lomdus
of yeshivish mesechtas, not mesechta Brochos let's say. Recently, a Rosh
Yeshiva asked me what I'm learning. Brochos, I told him. There was silence.
Brochos is all about yiras shemayim and tefillah. They don't study that one.
Guilt is really fear of gehennom and mostly for bitul Torah. And gelt is to
support the Torah study.
Some of the main traits of cults are
fear, control, and isolation. The yeshiva world is endlessly pushing fear: the
terror of Elul, punishment for this, for that. Control comes through rules upon
rules added to the halacha. There is massive social control. The phrase chas
v'shalom is used to control your emotions. Your mind is controlled through
saying who do you think you are. They have 1000 ways of putting you down,
putting you in your place. “Oh so you think you know something? Tell me how
many mesechtas have you learned?” I never in my life heard such putdowns as in
the yeshiva world, like calling somebody a nobody. There are guys I know who do
not believe they are allowed to offer even Torah thoughts. It must come only
through an approved rabbi. Here's where the isolation comes in. They will ask
about any Torah thought you offer, who said that. That's imperative to them.
And there's a list of approved people. And everyone outside the yeshiva world
is put down or knocked out of the game: Chassidim, Sephardim, Modern Orthodox,
Academics, and mostly Rabbi Soloveitchik and Chabad. You are isolated from
anything but the yeshiva way. I spent decades trying to find my way in that
world and it tore me to pieces. I found it all so empty and cruel.
It seems often that Yeshivist
rabbanim see their job as contradicting you. This explains why their advice is
usually wrong, at least in my experience. Most of the time, you know on your
own what to do. So if somebody is always contradicting you, he is going to give
you bad advice. Do the opposite and you'll make the right move. This rabbi
contradicted me about everything. When I said I was looking for Torah tapes to
listen to, he told me none of them were any good. When I told him that I was
attending shiurim in person, he said, why not just listen to recorded shiurim
on line. A goyish coworked said to me, “I can always tell when you have been
talking to your rebbe.” “How is that,” I said. “Because you sound confused
afterward.”
That's an amazing comment. I was
amazed he knew the term rebbe. The Baal Shem Tov said you can learn from
anything, Hashem speaks to you in all kinds of ways, including through
gentiles. There are Chassidic stories with examples of that. I believe this was
such a case. These words were clearly put into this gentile's mouth. They were
words which really went to my heart and helped me to see how crazy this rabbi
was making me. Looking back, I believe his problems had everything to do with
him being Yeshivist.
This rabbi also was an againstnik, as
Rabbi Soloveitchik called it. Rabbi Soloveitchik told a student, “Don't be an
againstnik.” There's a Marx Brothers song, “Whatever it is, I'm against it.”
This rabbi had an unkind word about everything. He mocked academic Judaism,
Yeshiva University, Rabbi Soloveitchik, and Chassidism on a regular basis. He
mocked Aryeh Kaplan for teaching kabbalah. He once told me that all the extra
commentary in Artscroll Mishyanos and Gemaras was unnecessary and confused
people and that Artscroll would get gehennom for it. He didn't like the
Artscroll book on Tehillim either. “David didn't need it,” he said, meaning
Dovid didn't need all the commentary on the Tehillim.
What kind of crazy comment is that?
Should I say that the Amaraim didn't need Rashi or Tosfos? This man just wanted
to oppose everything. I think it comes from the contemporary Litvish mentality
of living for nothing but Gemara lomdus, which makes a person argumentative,
and of never leaving the beis midrash, which leads to being out of touch with
reality. I think also it comes from condescension of baal habatim, that they
can't handle any real thought or complexity.
Chasidic rabbis can have their own
nonsense, but it comes from a different place. In Chabad, they are too much
focused on one person, and not necessarily even his Torah, but just him as a
topic. Often there's too insufficient focus on halacha, too much on kabbalah.
They can overwhelm newcomers with that. They surely have their own foolishness,
but somehow to me it's not quite as toxic, not as bullying.
Even though many Litivsh rabbanim often
take away everything from you, they generally don't give anything back. The
school I attended was like that. They wouldn't let us study Mishnah, halacha,
grammar, Gemara bekiyus, musar, or history. They wouldn't let us date, wear
hats, or lead davening. Everything was no. But they didn't replace it with
anything. This is too often the Yeshivist way. They make an avodah zara out of
the word no. It's all din.
That you must listen to your rav is a
major mantra in the Yeshivist world. I have been asked numerous times by
rabbis, do you have a rav? It's not that they were offering to be my rav if I
didn't have one. It's just this thing to ask. It could be they are so lost in
their identity as rabbis, that it just comes to mind. It's like British
comedian John Cleese once noted, that he spoke to a merchant banker who was so
caught up in his profession that he didn't seem to have any other identity.
Cleese wrote a skit: “Hi I'm a merchant banker. My name is. Well I've forgotten
my name, but I am a merchant banker.”
But why make this an identity? I
think it results from the Yeshivist value system which these days is all about
prestige, being a gadol. Think about the word, gadol. Being a great. Is that
Jewish? Aren't we the people distinguished by our compassion, modesty, and
HUMILITY? I can hear being a talmid chocham as a goal. It translates as student
of wisdom but being a great? By definition, only a few can be gadolim because
it's all relative. Wealth works this way. We can't all be billionaires. There's
not enough money. A century ago the goal was to become a millionaire. In those
days, not everyone could be a millionaire because there wasn't enough money.
It's all relative. Now being a millionaire is nice but not wildly impressive.
Walgreens took over the pharmacy market. I know a woman whose family had a
pharmacy. That's how Walgreens started too. For whatever reasons, Walgreens
took over the pharmacy world. Now there
are a few other chains, but not everyone who ran a pharmacy was able to develop
into a chain. You can only have so many. This woman's family pharmacy went out
of business. My great-grandfather had a pharmacy in Russia. It's all gone now.
We can't all be titans. And we can't all be gadolim. Now it could be that when
they say gadol, they mean huge talmid chocham. Maybe to some extent they mean
that. But I think they mostly mean famous top talmid chocham and there's only
room in our minds for a limited number of famous people. Only a few can be on
the top. So what happens is most people feel like failures. To build themselves
up, they get caught up in their identity as rabbis. It's a way of feeling
superior at least to the baal habatim.
I was talking to a Rosh Yeshiva
recently about the possibility that his major donor might be moving on. He
said, then we'll find another, which is a nice thought. But he added
condescendingly, that's the way a baal habayis thinks, that you'll be lost
without that one donor. He had to add that dig on baal habatim. Couldn't he say
that's the way some people think? I know many baalei batim who utter all kinds
of good thoughts of bitachon. I have heard so many disparaging remarks by
rabbis about baal habatim, even their own baal habatim. I was learning once
with a rabbi who was trying to complement my level of learning by saying that I
was like one of his baal habatim. It was a complement, but it was also an
insult. I remember a rabbi from the Teaneck/Englewood area coming to Passaic
and publicly groaning about the religious level of“my baal habatim.” I was
taken aback. There were 200 people in the room. What a busha. We all know the
phrase “baal habatisheh pshot.” That means, intellectually weak, silly. The
same kind of slur is made with the phrase “Rebbeish pshot,” that is a thought
from a Chassidic rebbe.
Mocking the chassidim is habit to Yeshivists.
Yes, they are good with kashrus and tznius. Yes, we admit to attending their
tishes from time to time. But where it really counts, gemara lomuds, we have it
all over them. That's the attitude. For intellect, come to us. I heard a rabbi
in Passaic say before a shiur that all of the great scholars are Yeshivists.
It's such a preposterous statement. Rav Moshe Feinstein, who was Litvish but
Russian, used to send Rav Ephraim Greenblatt to the Satmar Rebbe with questions.
According to Rav Greenblatt, that is the only person he was ever sent to and
Reb Moshe always accepted the answers. There's a long list of great chassidic
scholars. The comment was inaccurate and hurtful. Why say it? He said because
he wants to feel superior to somebody.
I'll repeat again that I am careful
here to to talk about contemporary Litvish attitudes because it seems to me
that the old-time Litvish approach was different. The Vilna Gaon writes in Even
Shelaimah that the purpose of life is to fix one's middos. As I have said, he
says Torah is like a tree and mitzvos the fruit and the purpose of the tree is
the fruit. He says it's important not to overtax the student. “Just as in
craftsmanship one should learn an honest and easy trade, so in Torah one should
seek an easy area of study that will not tax his capabilities and lead him to
stop studying.” Learning should be pleasant. He sounds more like the
Lubavitcher Rebbe than he does the people who claim to be his spiritual legacy.
So any comparisons I make between the Chassidic or Chabad outlook and the Yeshivist
world are between Chasidus and the contemporary Litvish world, the one I
encounter today.
Questioning the Yeshivist world is
rather bold no? There are many great figures in that world. So who am I to
question. Well, I do it anyway, but privately. This is not an open letter. It's
a letter to me.
I wouldn't expect that the
contemporary Litvish world came out of the blue. It is being informed by the
old-time one to some extent. For example, the Lubavitcher Rebbe said:
Before the dawn of Chassidus, many Jewish communities lacked
harmony. A gulf, rarely breached, separated the common folk from the scholarly
elite. In many regions, that chasm had become so deeply entrenched that the
townsmen who identified with either of the two diverse groups even congregated
in separate shuls.
For many individuals, a similar cleavage marred the
harmonious cross-fertilization that should spark all the positive components of
one's inner world. For such individuals, Divine service had been defined almost
exclusively in terms of erudition. The potential fire and energy possessed by
every soul were often allowed to lie dormant.
Chassidus broke through these barriers. This was no mere
sociological phenomenon. It was a spiritual dynamic, for the study of Chassidus
empowers a person to tap into the yechidah of the Torah, its spiritual essence,
which arouses the very essence of his soul." This in turn creates harmony
within the individual's spiritual personality - between his intellect, on the
one hand, and his super-rational powers of faith and kabbalas ol, the
acceptance of G-d's dominion. Furthermore, it engenders unity among the Jewish
people by revealing and highlighting the common soul-root by virtue of which all
Jews are brothers.
The study of Chassidus also uncovers the intrinsic harmony
that underlies the Torah itself, unifying nigleh, the revelaed corpus of the
Torah, with pnimiyus haTorah, the mystical dimension which is its soul.
(7th Lubavitcher Rebbe, Tackling
Life's Tasks, p. 4-5; See Likkutei Sichos, Vol. 15, p. 281ff)
So you see, this is an old debate. It
has changed somewhat. Litvacks aren't what they used to be and neither are
Chassidim. I was at a vort in Passaic and noted how all the bachurim dressed
exactly alike. I was at a shalom zachar in Passaic where the bachurim all sang
for three hours. I checked to see what a room full of Boyan chassidim were
studying in Kiryat Sefer. It was Gemara. The differences are largely
superficial today for most Yeshivists and most Chassidim. But there still are
some differences, particularly between Yeshivists and Chabad, and those
differences have a history.
I saw in a pamphlet by Rav Elchonon
Wasserman zt'l (1874-1941) how our free time should be filled with Torah study
and some of our time should go to mitzvos.
“Rejoice not, Israel, with the gladness of the
peoples." It is not for the Jew to indulge in pleasure in the way the
Gentiles do. Gentiles have free time when their work is done and look for amusements
and sports with which to pass the time. The Jew has no spare time; after he has
finished his work, it remains his duty to occupy himself with the study of the
Torah. He who is incapable of studying by himself must find a Rabbi to teach
him. The Jew is also required to dedicate some of his time to the fulfilment of
the divine precepts and of good deeds to help others to the best of his
ability. The Torah demands such a way of life from the Jew. "Be ye
holy." The Jew must be holy, his house must be holy, and his whole heart
must be holy.
As much respect as I have for Rav
Wasserman, I felt uncomfortable reading that. What does he mean “some of his
time to the fulfilment of the divine precepts”? It's all of our time. Our whole
lives are mitzvos. That's how we connect to God. I have rolled these words over
in my brain many times. Many he is talking about mitzvos that are defined as
positive actions like wearing tefillin because surely shmiras enayim and
refraining from lashon hara go on all day long. But why would he just talk
about some of the concrete mitzvos? I don't get it. I just don't get it. How
can he say that “some” of our time goes to mitzvos?
So the Torah study-centric view is
not just a contemporary view. I don't know how far back it goes. I see in
Shaarei Teshuvah of the Rabbeinu Yona, the Duties of the Heart, and the Ramchal
discussion of many mitzvos and concepts of ahavas and yiras Hashem. So even
though Yeshivists like to say that they have the true tradition and the
Chassidim invented something new, they appear really to be doing something new,
something that is possibly influenced by the explosion of secular education and
universities, which is studying that has little connection to life as I have
explained. As I mentioned, I consider that maybe we have dropped so far in our
level in modern times that we get the
most bang for the buck if we focus on Torah learning. Maybe focusing on all the
mitzvos just doesn't work anymore. That would be my dan l'chaf zchus on the
matter. As the song goes, “Sweet dreams are made of this. Who am I to
disagree?” It may work for people in the Yeshivist world, but it didn't work
for me, it left me cold to Hashem and mitzvos.
Now, who am I to question Rav
Elchonon Wasserman who returned to Europe in the middle of World War Two so his
students wouldn't be alone. He died with them. So I'll try not to question him.
Rather I'll find what motivates me. If the Yeshivist approach motivated him to
be a tzadick of such magnitude that I can only look at it from afar, that's
wonderful. But the Yeshivist approach had a very detrimental effect on me.
Intuitively, I feel that all the mitzvos matter. I can't live for one thing. It
just doesn't make sense to me.
Likewise I liked Rav Gifter. I have a
book on his parsha thoughts. I enjoy it. He was spunky and fun. He accomplished
so much, an American born gadol who built a major yeshiva in the Midwest. I
like Boruch Kaplan too. He was a staunch anti-Zionist, as am I, and he lived an
interesting life, accomplishing great things. I just don't relate to the
approach that is ascribed to them. Maybe for them, focusing on Gemara
automatically leads to mitzvos. After all, the Gemara talks mostly about
mitzvos, so maybe mitzvah observance follows for them. I am not so capable of
going through all of Shas. I can just get through small pieces, so I won't hear
about all the mitzvos with Gemara study. Maybe for them it's a different
experience. It doesn't really matter because I have a different derech to
pursue. And I don't mind these guys as long as they don't obstruct my journey.
Many from that world did obstruct me.
I can't speak for all baal habatim,
but I guess the Litivsh approach isn't so practical for many. The average guy
works 10 hours a day to pay the bills. If only Torah study matters, what's he
doing all day long? How is he going to feel good about it? And what about
women. They don't study really. Supporting learning is indirect. I think this
is one reason Chassidic women seem so much frummer than Yeshivist ones.
Kiddushah is important in that world. The Yeshivist women are sort of lost. So
they are told, that tznius is like Torah learning for women. Everything is
framed in reference to Torah study.
This can mess up one's life. I made
many bad decisions because my perspective was warped by the obsession with
Torah study. I'll give an example. I worked at a company where I had a choice
between two job openings. One was working with a friend doing document
management. The other was working with some strangers doing online purchasing.
My heart is with the document management. I'm a bibliophile who always wanted
to be a librarian. But the online purchasing was potentially a higher income
path. I went with the latter because more money would mean more Torah learning
eventually. What happened? I was bored really. My heart wasn't in it. I don't
care so much about commerce. And that department was laid off anyway. Twenty
years later my friend's department is still going. There are many incidents in
my life like this. I won't list them all. But there have been many times that I
made bad decisions based on this idea that nothing matters but Torah learning.
A person can wind up very greedy from
this attitude. I have seen it in others. They start doing anything to get money
because you need money to study full time. They take financial gambles that are
inadvisable. They steal or lie to varying degrees. I spent years in terror
about money even though I was making enough to live decently but not enough to
learn full time. Judaism as one mitzvah is not a balanced approach to life.
It's not wisdom.
The attitude is imbibed via
ubiquitous programming. I was once walking to a shalom zachar, and my neighbor,
a rabbi, and I started talking. This is the only time he ever talked to me.
What did he say? He told me to quit my job and try to become a rosh yeshiva. He
knew nothing about me. He didn't know if I could get through a page of Gemara.
There's a widespread attitude in the
yeshiva world that you can turn yourself into a genius if only you try hard
enough. It's lunacy. They love to say how the Chazon Ish had an ordinary mind
but turned himself into the gadol hador. Meanwhile, the Chazon Ish's first
cousin was Saul Lieberman, an unparalleled genius, whose writings on the
Tosefta are nothing short of monumental. Rabbi Lieberman was expert in the
Babli, Yerushalimi, Tosefta, Greek, and all kinds of Semitic languages. He knew
Yerushalmi baal peh. There's a story of
him going through the first three sedarim of Yerushalmi in three minutes in his
mind in order to answer a question he was asked. He might have had the broadest
knowledge of any Judaic scholar of his era. This includes the Charedi gadolim. The
Chazon Ish reportedly wrote to him, “You were always the scholar in the
family.” Rav Moshe Feinstein reportedly said about the criticisms of Lieberman
“Leave him alone. Such a scholar.” The great posek R' Nissim Karelitz just
happens to be the son of the Chazon Ish's sister. I once played chess with a
young man who was related to the Chazon Ish. He played with his back to the
board, calling out moves from memory. He beat me game after game, usually in
about a dozen moves. And I can play some chess. This wasn't a descendant of the
Chazon Ish because the Chazon Ish didn't have any children. The whole family
was brilliant, genius. The Soloveitchiks are the same way. Well there don't
happen to be any geniuses or scholars in my family. Rabbi Joseph Soloveitchik
said that you cannot make yourself a genius.
Nevertheless, it is standard in the
yeshiva world to tell the boys, no matter what their talents or backgrounds,
that if they just try hard enough, they can become a Roshei Yeshiva, the
ultimate in human being. Example from a memorial article:
He told a family member that when he came to Lakewood, he
was incapable of properly making a laining on a blatt Gemara! After a short
period, he felt that he would not succeed and decided to leave. Rav Nosson
Wachtfogel saw the bochur with his bags preparing to leave and insisted that he
stay and persevere. The rest is history. He ended up becoming one of the
closest Talmidim of Rav Aharon Kotler and an instrumental link in the chain of
mesoras haTorah on American shores. (Yated, Aug. 6, 2021, p. 56)
Boys hear stories like that and feel
terrible about themselves – not that we shouldn't push ourselves to accomplish
more. But there's a persistent idea in the yeshiva world that the only
worthwhile goal is to become a Rosh Yeshiva and anybody is capable of it. All
who don't make it are failures. They just didn't try hard enough. Like I could
play basketball like Michael Jordan if I just tried hard enough. Isn't this a
kind of apikorsis? It's certainly a denial of reality. Perhaps, it's a
perversion of the true goal in life of becoming a tzadick (or in the Tanya's
formulation a benoni). That, each of us can become on some level. When true
instincts for Godly matters are directed to the physical, some very bad things
happen. It's like Rabbi Avigor Miller says, each man has an instinct for the
Divine. When misapplied,people want to do things like travel the world. They
know something is out there and they project it onto the physical, thus wasting
their days in search of something that is not to be found by traveling.
Here's another one:
A young bachur learning in the Lomza Yeshiva in Petach Tikva
would rise immediately after the rosh yeshiva finished delivering his shiur, go
stand in a corner, and begin reviewing the entire shiur by heart. Some bachurim
viewed his conduct as a bit strange, but that bachur took no notice. He wanted
to know the shiur. Nothing else mattered to him. Do you know the name of that
bachur? His name was Chaim Kanievsky! That is the power of chazarah!” thundered
the rosh yeshiva. “Those bachurim may have thought it strange but no one knows
who they are today! Rav Chaim, however, became a sar haTorah and a gadol
ha’dor! (5TJT, “Gedolei Torah Address Dirshu Worldwide Siyumim On Seder Moed,”
October 30, 2014)
There it is again, nothing else
matters but Torah study and the big prize is becoming a gadol. You read this
story and think this was some average guy who turned himself into a gadol when
his father happened to be the Steipler Gaon, one of the era's greatest Torah
scholars.
Another rabbi told me a story of a
guy who had a near death experience. When he awoke he told his wife he was
quitting his job to learn full time because he saw what was important. This
story was told to a table of Modern Orthodox baal habatim, many of who are
barely getting by. Should they be quitting their jobs? Should they feel
dissatisfied with themselves that they have jobs and are not learning all day?
How do they go into work the next and perform up to standard? You have to work hard
in America. You can only do that if you take pride in what you are doing, not
if you are ashamed of it.
This subject is almost too painful to
write about. My writing in this article isn't my best. The topic is so
upsetting that my sentences are coming out disjointed, not flowing well. I need
to edit but cannot because it's all too painful.
The learning as everything attitude
is so toxic and so widespread. It's like taking on the ocean, so ubiquitous
today is the Yeshivist mentality. I saw recently a sicha from the Lubavitcher
Rebbe on Devarim 8:15: “Who led you through that great and awesome desert, [in
which were] snakes, vipers and scorpions, and drought, where there was no
water; who brought water for you out of solid rock.” He says the great and awesome
desert symbolizes the goyish world. We become intimidated by it and replace our
religious pursuits for worldly ones. We become passionate about those. That is
the snake whose venom is hot. This leaves us cold toward religion, which is
symbolized by the cold venom of the scorpion. That leaves us thirsting for
something that we cannot name.
The Rebbe is talking about the
secular world, but I hear his words talking about about the Yeshivist world, at
least my experience of it. There are so many Yeshivist shuls, yeshivahs, and
rabbis. They dominate the culture today. I was in a Chassidish yeshiva in Bene
Brak and looked at the daily schedule. It was identical with a Yeshivist
yeshiva. Gemara b'iyun in the morning, bikius in the afternoon. Chassidus wasn't
on the menu. The Sephardic world also is dominated by Yeshivist culture. I know
a Sephardic guy who pursues his Sephardic identity, or at least he thinks he
does. But when you talk to him, you hear a Litvack. He doesn't mention Sepharid
Chochamim so much, he doesn't talk about kabbalah. It's all Gemara lomdus. Even
one who avoids the gentile world can get swallowed by the Yeshivist one. This
may lead to a “passion” for Gemara lomdus and nothing else. “Nothing else
mattered.” I heard recently of a guy who was unhappy in the Yeshivist world and
found himself in Karlin-Stolin Chassidus. Still he commented (not so
believably) my greatest happiness is completing a mesechta. You could tell that
this was the Yeshivist programming still living inside him. For many this leads
to a coldness toward to the mitzvos (“you gotta do what you gotta do”) and
toward Hashem, Who may not be mentioned at a yeshiva dinner. It happened to me.
That led to a thirst for something I couldn't name and all kinds of secular
pursuits that led to nowhere.
I hear all the time Yeshivist rabbis
talk about mitzvos like robotic tasks. They drone on about mesiras nefesh even
as they do little of it. Everything is a chiyuv. Yet, Rabbi Soloveitchik wrote:
Man must worship his Creator not only out of a feeling of
absolute decree and coercion but also out of spontaneous variegated desire and
aspiration which gladdens the heart. The Torah commands us to serve God with
joy, with longing and yearning, enjoyment and happiness, unfettered pleasure, and
the soul's delight. When man does not see God and sense His presence at every
turn; when he thinks of God only out of fear of punishment, with a cool
intellect, without ecstasy, joy or enthusiasm; when his actions lack soul,
inwardness and vitality, then his religious life is flawed. At the same time,
if man is not always aware of God, if he does not walk with God in all his ways
and paths, if he does not sense God's touch on his stooped shoulders in times
of distress and loneliness imparting a certain comfort and encouragement, the
his service is likewise incomplete.
(Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik, And From There You Shall Seek in Mesorat
HaRav Siddur, p. 77)
…the religious person is given not only a duty to follow the
halakha but also a value and vision. The person performing the duty seeks to
realize this ideal or vision. Kant felt that the duty of consciousness
expresses only a "must" without a value. He demanded a routine form
of compliance, an "ought" without aiming at a value. As a soldier
carries out his duty to the commanding officer, one may appreciate his service
or just obey through discipline and orders. Kant's ethics are a "formal
ethics", the goal is not important.
For us it would be impossible to behave this way. An intelligent person
must find comfort, warmth, and a sense of fulfillment in the law. We deal with
ethical values, not ethical formalisms. A sense of pleasure must be gained by
fulfilling a norm. The ethical act must have an end and purpose. We must become
holy. (Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik, Mesorat HaRav Siddur, p. 112-3)
The Yeshivist world to me was like
Kant, routine compliance fueled by a kind of cold terror. Now, Rav Soloveitchik
was a Litvack; although as mentioned he had a Chabad melamed as a kid and was
very broadly educated, and he was quite passionate for Hashem. He referenced
the Chabad melamed on many occasions and said that without the melamed his
Judaism would have been dry. In Chabad, mitzvos aren't just a chiyuv. They are
talked about as being part of who we are. They are an expression of our
essence. We don't just do them because we must.
But there's more, there's also the
coldness of how many Yeshivists go about mitzvos and life. And it's not just
coldness, it's intentionally induced misery. I heard recently of a Yeshivist
rabbi who told a young man that Judaism is not for happiness. He said if you
want to be happy, become a Christian. It's a terrible comment. And it's
dangerous. Pain is a danger sign. We go to the doctor when we have enduring
pain. We ignore the pain at our peril. Feelings of discomfort are how we know
that we might be hurting others. If one becomes numb to it, he can do enormous
harm. I have noticed in several rabbis I know who engaged in inappropriate
sexual conduct that they were generally stressed out people. Thus, the feelings
of anxiety that inappropriate conduct generate didn't register with them.
This Succos a Yeshivist guy talking
about happiness. He said we are obligated to be happy keeping the Torah. He
didn't give any reasons why we should be happy just that the one who is not is
a sinner and is stupid.
I need not talk about the emphasis of
Chassidus on happiness. It's famous for this. “Joy breaks all barriers,” taught
the fourth Chabad Rebbe, Rabbi Sholom DovBer. The Rebbe said, “True happiness
is the highest form of self-sacrifice. There, in that state, there is no sense
of self—not even awareness that you are happy. True happiness is somewhere
beyond 'knowing.' Beyond self. All the more so when you bring joy to others.”
(Likutei Sichot vol. 16, pp. 365–372) The Rebbe wrote in a letter:
B”H, 9 MarCheshvan, 5711
Greetings and blessings,
In response to your express letter: I have asked you and
cautioned you several times not to be sad or depressed.
I explained to you [my] rationale; that my revered
father-in-law, the Rebbe, הכ"מ,
blessed you many times and, “a tzaddik decrees, and the Holy One, blessed be
He, fulfills [that decree],” as the Talmud ordains.1
Heaven forbid to cast any doubt about this or to weaken your
trust, for in addition to all the statements of our Sages explaining how [being
depressed] is undesirable, [it also] ruins the channels of influence. To refer
to the wording of the Zohar, Parshas Tetzaveh, p. 184b:
Come and see: The lower world is always ready to receive. It
is called “the jewel.” The upper world grants its influence only in response to
[the lower world’s] approach. If the approach from below is with a shining
face, influence is also beamed forth to it from Above. But if, however, its
approach is with sadness, it is given judgment in return. In this vein, [it is
stated]:2 “Serve G‑d with happiness,” and the happiness of a person draws down
sublime happiness of another type.
It is about time you started obeying this.
With blessings for all sorts of everlasting good and, in
particular, for a speedy recovery,
Menachem Schneerson
In
Chassidus, happiness is an entire topic unto itself. That's quite a stretch
from telling a bochur that happiness isn't a Jewish thing. Before the Chassidim
were called Chassidim, they were called the freilach, the happy ones.
The
Rebbe said that even teshuvah should be done with simcha. As Rav Yehuda Leib
Shapiro explains it, teshuvah was given not just to the average Jew but to the
sinner. All mitzvos are given by God so we should be happy doing it. With
teshuva it's even more so because God lowered Himself so to speak and gave it
to us. He says that if you look at mitzvos as burdens, as these things you have
to do, then you won't be happy doing it and it will be a burden. It you look at
it like 'nebech you have to do it' then it becomes a burden. And isn't that
exactly how the Yeshivist Rosh Yeshiva described it to me? A guy accepted help
to carry a bag of rocks but not a bag of diamonds. Why? When he appreciates
what he's doing, he wants to carry it, wants to make sure he's go it.
Then
there's the soul. Being a holistic system, when Chassidus talks about the soul,
it talks about the entire soul. In the yeshiva world, you pretty much only hear
about the yetzer hara. But in Chassidus, there's the animal soul and the godly
soul, the latter of which is talked about extensively.
G‑d formed the human out of the dust of the ground and blew
into his nostrils a soul of life Genesis 2:7.
By “blowing” the soul into the body, G‑d indicated that our
soul originates deeper “within” Him than does the rest of creation. This
emphasizes the fact that we are the primary purpose of Creation, whereas
everything else is secondary.
Our Divine soul is a spark of G‑d. Therefore, the soul can
never lose its intrinsic connection with G‑d. Our challenge is to ensure that
this connection remain manifested within our physical being. Just as when one
blows, the air can reach its destination only if there are no physical
obstructions, so too, the more we free our lives of spiritual “sludge” –
harmful or negative thoughts, words, or deeds – the more our G‑dly souls can
shine freely.
This
is one of many excerpts I can give where Chassidus talks about the Godly soul or
the yetzer tov. The Tanya is largely built on such talk.
As
a result of this emphasis on the soul, Chasidus better recognizes human
individuality. I find again and again in the yeshiva world that we are all
viewed the same. Actually, there are two kinds of people rabbanim and baalei
batim. The latter group all look alike to the former. But in Chassidus:
Every individual is required to serve G-d according to his
nature and spiritual level. A person who can pierce pearls or polish gems, yet
occupies himself with baking bread, is considered to have sinned, even though
this too is a much needed task. The parallels to this in our Divine service are
obvious. Igros Kodesh of the 6th Lubavitcher Rebbe, the Rebbe Rayatz, letter
#1022, Heb. Vol. 4, p. 340.
And
because we are each souls on a journey, we will move at different speeds:
One cannot expect a Jew who has
drifted from the Jewish way of life to transform himself suddenly, and it is
necessary to bring him closer to G-d by stages, yet we have to present to him
the true aspects of our Torah and Mitzvoth, and not in any diluted form.
(Letters by the Lubavitcher Rebbe, p. 176)
An
important product of seeing each person as a neshama is having esteem for each
person. A Yeshivist Rosh Yeshiva referred dismissively in a private
correspondence to “leftover bochurim that nobody wants.” That's a terrible way
to talk about an Orthodox Jewish boy. In general, it's hard to get time with Yeshivist
rabbanim. I once wrote two heart felt letters to Yeshivist rabbanim asking if I
could take my son to see them. One didn't answer. As for the other, I did get a
call from his wife who said that “even important people” can't get into see
him. She said maybe I could come by one afternoon when he does krias haTorah.
Meanwhile, I have had yechidus with four Chassidic Rebbes: the Tosher Rebbe,
the Bostoner Rebbe, the Nicholsburg Rebbe, and the Biala Rebbe. All it took was
a simple request. The Lubavitcher Rebbe spent countless hours with people and
conducted a massive correspondence. I saw him about a dozen times. It wasn't
hard. He made himself so available even though what human being could possibly
have been busier?
The
idea of a bond between Rebbe and chossid is a foundation of Chassidus. Each
chassid matters. This applies even after death. The Chumash says no man knows
Moshe's burial place. Yet, the Zohar says he is found in the Mishnah. When the
Rebbe Rashab was near the end of his life he said he was going off to heaven
but left his manuscripts with the Chasidim. This meant that one could connect
to him through the writings in which he vested so much of himself. The
Lubavitcher Rebbe's wife said during her deposition before the court case
involving her father's library that the books belonged to the Chasidim because
her father belonged to the Chasidim.
In
his commentary on parhas Tetzave (Kehot Chumash), the Rebbe highlights a number
of the themes I have identified here, including the importance of practical
life and the relationship between leaders and the people. He says in parshas
Terumah, God instructed us how to build the Mishkan. However, a house is built
to be lived in. Tetzava tells the Kohanim what to do in the Mishkan. Tetzve
means you will do but it also means you will connect. We connect to Hashem via
our actions in the Mishkan. And we each are a mini-Mishkan, just as we each are
Kohanim – a nation of priests. However we can't all really be priests. Most of
us have to be in the world so that we can refine it. So we need priests to
inspire the people. The priests are superior. However, they serve the people by
inspiring them to accomplish their task, which is the true purpose of creation.
You
see in the powerful thought that the purpose of the universe is not just
scholarship and scholars. All the people have a purpose, and not just to
support scholars. Rather, the actions in their every day lives are part of the
purpose of the world. A Litivsh Rosh Yeshiva once told me he'd admit that the
yeshivas with their rigid curriculum of all day Gemara lomdus sacrifice the few
for the many. I told him he was sacrificing the many for the few. Only the
scholars matters.
One
gets the feeling in the Yeshivah world that the Rosh Yeshivas need the baalei
batim only for money. They answer questions if asked. You can't not answer a
question, but the Yeshivist Rav would be just as happy to study Torah in peace.
It's different with Chassidim. The Rebbe and the Chassidim need each other. The
Frierdiker Rebbe describes a farbrengen at the sheva brachos of Reb Yaakov
Mordechai:
"… In middle of it all, [Reb Yaakov Mordechai] began to
cry bitterly, to the degree that all those present were astounded. They asked
him to stop crying, but to no avail… Everyone began dancing, all besides Reb
Yaakov Mordechai, who leaned his head on his hands and cried. When they poured
cups to say l'chaim, he stopped crying and began to say in a tearful voice,
"The Rebbe [Maharash] told me, 'When there is a Rebbe, there are
chassidim, but chassidim who do and work.' When a chossid is not a chossid, he
makes his Rebbe no more a Rebbe. The Alter Rebbe was a Rebbe, and he made
chasidim, and the chassidim, being that they were chassidim and “people of
deed” with avoda sheb'leiv, they strengthened their Rebbe…"
Yes,
the appeal of chassidus and Chabad chassidus is clear. Yet, both have so many
critics in the Yeshiva world. It shouldn't be surprising. Deos lead to middos.
If you deos are narrow, selfish, and dark then your outlook on others will be
the same. There's a cottage industry of Yeshivists who try to talk baalei
teshuvah out of become Lubavitch. It seems at times as if they all pass around
a memo instructing them to do this. The same goes for Rabbi Soloveitchik. When
you press them, they can't even give any specifics. Chabad is bad. Soloveitchik
is bad. (Heaven forbid.) That's all they know. I have sat with talmidei
chochomim who can't elaborate at all on what the problem is. They are so
ignorant. They know nothing about either Chabad or Soloveitchik and offer worn
out tropes, gossip, myths. I hesitate to repeat them.
I'll
recite just a few. “Chabad keeps to itself,” a Rosh Yeshiva said to me
recently. It was a criticism. It's absurd. Chabad reaches out to everyone. It's
the Yeshivists who keep to themselves. So Chabad doesn't join the Agudah. Is
that a requirement in life? Rav Chaim Soloveitchik didn't like the Agudah
either. It's a political organization. The fact is, Chabad is shunned by the Yeshivists.
I know Chabad men who have endured so many insults after being recognized for
their unique dress that they feel unwelcome at Yeshivist events. Yet, in Chabad
shuls, everyone is welcome. It's really the Yeshivists who push people away with
all their rules. There's a rav near my house whose face shows shock when he
sees me without a tie on Shabbos. Have to have that tie. It's a mitzvah
d'orisa.
A
Yeshivist rabbi said to me that Rabbi Soloveitchik wasn't interested in the
hamonam. Allegedly, he was once at a sheva brochos seudah and was asked to
speak and just started the sheva brachos. I don't even know if this story is
true. Even if it is, it's one silly little incident. Hardly a global
incrimination. Regardless, Rabbi Soloveitchik spoke every Tuesday night for
forty years to the baal habatim at Moriah Synogogue in Manhattan. Show me another gadol who spent that much time with the public. He spoke
every Motzei Shabbos for decades to the hamonam at Maimonidies school in
Brookline. He started the Maimonides school which at the beginning was for
barely religious and non-religious people. He taught at Yeshiva University
which is packed with regular people from the Modern Orthodox world. He had
many, many students who came from non-religious and barely religious homes. I have scores of articles that are based on talks he gave at simchas. It's the Charedi Yeshivist rabbanim that are not so interested in the
hamonam.
Jealousy
is a large part of the problem. Chabad as a group and Rabbi Soloveitchik as an
individual have an influence so far and beyond what just about any Litvack has.
They dethrone the Yeshivists who are used to seeing themselves as kings of the
hill. This is too much to take. Also, they can't handle the light. If you turn
on a bedroom light when a person is sleeping you might hear some complaining.
The yeshiva world can be so dark at times, so negative that they think there's
something wrong with light.
Is
all perfect in the Chassidic world? No, no, no. There are many problems. But I
can deal with them because the basic philosophy of life works for me. If you
have trouble with the foundational principles of your society, you are in for
grief. You'll endure clash after clash. The same goes in a marriage. Rav Shimon
Schwab – a German not a Litvack – advise me to marry somebody I like. There are
many conflicts in marriage and they are better handled if you are dealing with
somebody you like. Isn't that common sense? A Yeshivist rabbi told me that he
believed anybody could marry anybody. That contradicts the Gemara, but since
when does a Litvack obey the Gemara? (18 to the chuppah, teach your son a
trade, study what the heart desires.) He just studies it. I imagine that there
are people who are uncomfortable with the philosophy of Chassidus. So they
should be something else. A Chassid should be the first to say that. There are
Chabad Chasidim who think everyone should be Chabad. That's a Yeshivist thing
to think. We each have unique souls. Who can say how each person should connect
with Hashem?
The
Rebbe wrote:
[Moses told the Jewish people that in contrast to the rebels
among them, who had died out,] “all of you who are alive today are [lovingly]
attached to God.” Devarim 4:4
One might think that the more we are devoted to G-d, the
more our personal individuality disappears. The Torah teaches us here that the
opposite is true: Our true individuality depends directly upon the depth of our
attachment to G-d. What we normally mistake for our personality is really our
secondary, animalistic side. Since we share the same animal drives with the
rest of humanity, the personality born of these drives is, at best, a variation
on the common theme by which everyone lives. Thus, the apparent individuality
of this aspect of our personality is in fact an illusion.
In contrast, since G-d is infinite, the avenues through
which His Divinity can manifest itself through us are also infinite; thus, it
is only our Divine personality that makes us truly unique. It follows that the
more we allow the animalistic side of our personalities to dissolve as we draw
closer to D-d, the more we allow our unique, Divine personalities to shine forth.
(Lubavitcher Rebbe, Daily Wisdom, p. 365 )
Thus
you are allowed to be a Litvack, and I am allowed to be a Chassid.
I
was in the Yeshivist world for a long time, always asking Yeshivists to help me
out of the confusion and unhappiness I felt there. That usually only made it
worse. As the expression goes, “If you find yourself in a hole, stop digging.” I
was just given more poison most of the time. I felt like shattered glass. It
pains me to think of all the years I missed out. Today I walked by a bus
shelter where an entire pain of glass was cracked by a vandal. The glass didn't
collapse, but the cracks ran throughout like strings in a spider web. It was
beautiful. It occurred to me, broken glass can be beautiful. I remember a song
from my youth:
And
my life goes on, I believe
Somehow
something's changed
Something
deep inside
Ooh,
a part of me
There's
a strange new light in my eyes
Things
I've never known
Changing
my life
Changing
me
I've
been searching
So
long
To
find an answer
Now
I know my life has meaning, oh