This article has been written by Rav Ari Shvat (Chwat), Rosh Midreshet Tal Orot in Michlelet Orot, Elkana. He has graciously offered to share his wisdom with the readers of Tzipiyah.com, and given me a few, very powerful and all very relevant, articles to share with you. This is the third part of the first article. Enjoy!We ended that last part by explaining the gap of generations in Rav Kook’s time between the Religious Elders and Nationalist youth. Then, we said that: Rav Kook tells us that instead of division, the fathers and the sons should learn from eachother. Not only should the young learn religiousness from their elders, but as the navi Malachi directs us, in the generation of ge’ula, the converse is true , as well. והשיב לב אבות .על.בנים ולב בנים על אבותם The fathers should learn nationalism from their children, and the rebellious sons should return to the religion of their fathers. They should both realize that their common rebellion should be against the galut who’s time is up (as the sho’ah and rampant assimilation subsequently proved) , and that their common goal is to return to the days of yore. The artificial mechitza that they commonly erected between nationalism and religion should be removed, and the original religious –zionism should be restored.
The solution, suggests Rav Kook, is to be found in the root of the problem. Instead of seeing Torah as the deepest and most meaningful of G-dly eternal ideals, many, maybe even most, to this day, see Judaism as a religion, or set of shallow and meaningless rituals.
The story is told of how Rav Kook, upon one of his visits to an anti-religious kibbutz, was approached by one of the leaders who greeted him as follows: “With all due respect Rabbi, you shouldn’t waste your time trying to convince us to be religious. It’s not that we don’t know what Torah is, most of us were raised in observant homes. We know Torah, rabbis, mitzvot and we don’t like them!” Rav Kook questioned,”Why?” The kibbutznik replied: “We simply can’t stand your old-fashioned, meaningless, outdated rituals!” Exclaimed Rav Kook, “I agree”. “What?”, asked the surprised rebel. Explained the Rav, “I also hate the “religion” that you describe. But the dynamic, idealistic and deep Torah is so beautiful that anyone who is exposed to it cannot but love it!”.
And now, a few questions and answered:
Q. How could something so basic and appealing as the deepness of Judaism get “forgotten” over the generations?
A. The problem is that, to this day, in most yeshivot, the usual curriculum consists of Talmud, Talmud, Halacha and Talmud. The beauty and depth of Torah is easier to see through the study of the more philosophical, kabbilistic, chassidic, moralistic and deeper sources. Outsiders may find it hard to believe, but even the dynamic Tanach, the “best-seller” of all times in just about all languages, almost ceased to be learned in the Jewish halls of higher knowledge, even though we, Am Yisrael, the People of the Book, are the central figure!
Several explanations are offered as to why we all but ceased to learn the deep, beautiful, idealistic and appealing aspects of Torah.
a. The maskilim embraced the universally acclaimed Tanach, philosophy, and ethics as part of their objective to depreciate the importance of rabbinical Talmud (which they saw as “too Jewish” or restrictive). In reaction, the traditional community veered away from those universally appealing topics in order to distance the danger of assimilation, and conversely stressed the halachic do’s and don’t’s even more. Similarly, the secular zionist interest in Hebrew, Tanach and the Land of Israel knee-jerked many religious to recoil from the Holy Toungue, the Holy Book and the Holy Land!
b. Similarly, the fiasco of Shabtai Zvi, whose claims to being the messiah were based upon sources from the kabbalah, caused a super-conservative reaction against learning the more esoteric or mystical sources.
c. Some leaders in the charedi community have actually admitted that the problem is fear of questions or challenges inevitably raised through the study of these topics. If we try and understand the mitvot with our logic and our emotion in order to identify with them, there is the risk that the student will not understand nor identify. Subsequently he will likely forget that man cannot be the “measuring-stick” for a G-dly Torah, and that the study of the “why’s” cannot be but a partial understanding of G-d’s infinate wisdom. Similarly, the study of Tanach raises many questions and apparent contradictions from within (as expressed by bible critics) as we see in the Talmud. If it is difficult to ascertain that each and every teacher at all levels is adequetely trained to answer all of the many difficult and fundamental questions, some felt it safer to avoid these topics altogether.
d. Chovot HaL’vavot suggests that traditionally, status in the Jewish community came through excelling in the the complex study of Talmud. Other topics such as Tanach, ethics, understanding the meaning of the mitzvot, was seen as material for children and the less intellectual.
e. Technically, man had much less free time than he does today. Although the average Jew always knew how to read and spent much more time than his gentile counterpart on scholarship and study, before the techneologogical revolution, there wasn’t time for to learn everything. As such, the necessity of first learning halacha, Parshat Hashavua, and keeping up with the seasonal holidays took priority and the deeper studies were left for only the most learned.
f. The Tanach and subsequently the study of the depth of mitzvot are a “package deal”. Most mitzvot can be done only in Eretz Yisrael, and the real dynamic total life of Torat Hashem Tmima (=complete, perfect) as seen throughout the Tanach and ta’amei hamitzvot, can only apply when we are living our full national life in the Land where the Torah was meant for. The national, agricultural, military, geographical, purity, and sacrifical aspects, comprise most of the Tanach and ta’amei hamitzvot, and unfortunately were seen by many as secondary (at best) to the areas of Shabbat, Kashrut etc. which apply to everyday life in the galut. In short, Galut inherently is a very partial and incomplete Judaism, but nevertheless, that’s what was relevent to the Jew for 1,900 years. Consequently, the true width and depth of the complete Judaism as seen in the aforementioned topics were far-removed from the Jew in galut, and consequently their study was neglected.
Simply put, “From the time that Israel was exiled, G-d’s only place is in the 4 cubits (= the limited field) of halacha (Berachot 8a). Yet with all due respect to the unquestionable super-importance of g’mara and halacha (to which Rav Kook and his followers dedicatethe vast majority of their countless hours of learning), the depth, ideals and beauty of Torah are hard to see through the technical do’s and don’t’s.
Q. How did we manage on this relatively shallow Judaism without rebellion for so many years of exile? Why did the rebellion against religion wait so long?
A. When there is no competition, a product can stagnate and nevertheless its demand will continue. As long as religion had a monopoly over mankind, people didn’t examine or compare, they just followed the ways of their fathers. With the rennaisance, and afterwards the emancipation, the Jew began to see that the modern outside world has some appealing ideologies to offer. The gentile was no longer an uneducated heathen usually associated with drunkeness and violence. There was now an intellectually palatable alternative outside of Judaism.
Competition is forcing the rabbis to “market” Torah in the most appealing way possible. The question “how much must I pay if my ox gores your cow?” is not going to succeed in bringing back the masses to Judaism. On the other hand, the beauty, depth, and positive experiences of learning ethics, morals, ideals, hassidut, mussar, kabbalah, Tanach, philosophy, the appealing aspects of the G-dly Torah, will undoubtably bring them home!
One of the prevailing themes in the writings of Rav Kook is that in a world created by G-d who is good, everything, even that which appears to be bad, is for the good.
“The lofty ideal essence is revealed, that there are no opposites (contradictions) in the (unity of) reality. There is no “good” as opposed to “bad”, but there are only different levels of reality: “good” as opposed to a “higher good”…”.
This is one of the reasons most of Rav Kook’s books are named “Orot” or “The Lights of …..”. Even that which appears bad does so only because we have yet to see the good that will come. “Even the evil is really… the ‘developing good’.” Not only is failure a preparation for the good, but every advancement must be preceded by falling. This is based upon the kabbalistic idea that the physical world is an allegory to help us understand the metaphysical world. Just as in the physical world, in order to jump, we must first bend our knees. Even moreso, the more you wind –up, the further you can throw, and the lower you press a spring, the higher it will jump. Similarly spiritually,
‘אל תשמחי אויבתי לי כי נפלתי קמתי’ - אלולא שנפלתי לא קמתי ‘כי אשב בחשך ה’ אור לי’ - אלולא שישבתי בחשך לא היה אור לי:
“’For (because) I fell, I rose. Were I not to have fallen, I would not have risen”.
We can now understand Rav Kook’s explanation to the original question: Why did our rabbis teach us already 1,800 years ago that, preceding the ge’ula, there will be a mass rebellion against religion? What do we “benefit” from this terrible rebellion?
The answer: This rebellion against the seemingly shallow and stagnant old-fashioned Torah, is davka what necessitated the rediscovery of the original deep, exciting, dynamic and idealistic Torah of Eretz Yisrael, which had been forgotten and neglected. It was always around, just not studied by the masses. As we approach the ge’ula, Hashem wants the original Torah to be re-revealed, in all of her glory and appealing truth.
Q. Some question whether Rav Kook’s ideas in this article, which were ingeniusly appliccable in his generation, a generation of super-idealists, are still true regarding today’s non-religious in Israel?
A. It’s true that unfortunately, that entusiastic idealism once found among the chalutzim, is less common among the non-dati in Israel today. Nevertheless,
1. The high rate of 17% of Israeli adults who have become significantly more observant shows that although it’s obviously easier to be chiloni, when convinced, they are willing to “make the change”. Just as many get “turned on” by vegetarianism, humanism or other idealistic or activist causes or unfortunately, l’havdil by the far-east beliefs and ways, all of which demand a price for their idealism.
2. The main point is that they are still significantly closer to the modern rebel as described by Rav Kook, than they are to the rebel in the Tanach and Jewish history who knew that there is a G-d but He is too demanding. Today, the problem is not that Judaism is too difficult, but that since the renaissance, man will ask questions and won’t settle for something that seems shallow and meaningless. They wouldn’t be interested in “mumbo –jumbo” even if it were easy! They are not going to other, more convenient religions or movements (such as Reform or Conservative), but are definitely capable of being convinced. Even the argumentive nature of Jews (3 Jews will have 4 opinions), and especially Israelis (having in most elections more than 20 political parties, wheras America, about 4,000% larger, manages to make do with 2!), reflects the idealistic and uncompromising personality that demands meaning and won’t stand for emptiness.
3. In the modern world of freedom and transprtation, almost anyone who really wants to leave Israel, can (and not a few actually do). Among the majority that does stay, most serve in the army and are, when necessary, even willing to die for their land and country which they believe in. If chalila, another Yom Kippur War would break out, I have no doubt that the majority will stick and fight together and won’t flee to other countries, worrying just about themselves. Although most may not express it in day-to-day life, our rabbis say that the way to find out who a person really is inside, is how by his reaction under pressure and extenuating circumstances. As such, Am Yisrael is likened to the the olive whose goodness comes out under pressure.
In short, idealism is far from dead by the People of the Book. All we have to do is expose them to the beauty, depth and super-morality of Torah, and they are not only capable, but thirsty and searching.
Q. Granted, the beauty of Torah often speaks for itself, yet what about the difficulties, questions, apparent inconsistencies between the torah and modern morality and reality?
A. To relate seriously to each and every question people ask on Judaism is obviously beyond the scope of this publication. Not only is each question different and often unrelated, so too each questioner is unique. The only proper framework for this is “the oral Law”, face-to-face, and step –by-step, through personal guidance geared towards the pace, level, and mindset of the questioner.
Nevertheless, I believe it important to mention one issue which answers many of the most legitimate questions on halacha and Torah practice.
The “Master-Plan”of Torat Hashem tmima”, calls for a Sanhedrin to gather all gedolei hador to discuss and concretely decide how to deal with each new question or challenge that may arise. The fractionalization of Judaism into so many different customs and streams, where every local rabbi decides what is Judaism, was necessary during galut, but with modern communication, it is not only confusing but is often correctly seen as inconsistent and contradictory.
In addition, with no collective responsibility, most individual rabbis will inevitably shy away from making many significant statements or innovative decisions for fear of what the others will say. Subsequently, even if there are some (not many) “outdated” customs or halachot, they technically cannot change until the Sanhedrin is renewed. I don’t believe that we will forever pray in Y’kum Purkan for the great rabbis of Babylon, especially since for decades, there are no and will not be any more rabbis there at all! I obviously do not think it wise to give more controversial examples, yet the more learned a person is, the more he knows that there is a lot more flexibility than the current halachic framework allows.
Today, we are unnaturally and illogically in abeyance. On the one hand, with kibbutz galuyot, the centralization of the yeshivot and globalization, we are no longer in the disconnected dispersion, where each local rabbi monolithically defined halacha for his congregants. Not only are we all aware of the different approaches which need to be settled, but additionally, the abundance of questions raised by modern reality, deem necessary the Sanhedrin which has yet to be revived.
Here too, as in many cases, Rav Kook, in his historical and evolutionary view of the world, would say that not only is this a religious prayer, or blind belief, but it is logically inevitable, as well.
