Volume 38 Number 46 Produced: Thu Jan 30 6:40:28 US/Eastern 2003 Subjects Discussed In This Issue: General Studies & The Rav [Jeffrey Saks] Making of a Godol - protesting misrepresentation of Rav (2) [Daniel Eidensohn, <Maylocks1@...>] Rav and Medinat Yisrael-- Part I [Mike Gerver] Requirement of Saying blessings on Eclipses [<chips@...>] Woman Gadol [Ari Trachtenberg] To: <mail-jewish@...> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jeffrey Saks <atid@...> Subject: General Studies & The Rav On-Line Audio at www.atid.org RABBI JACOB J. SCHACTER ON GENERAL STUDIES, TORAH EDUCATION, & RABBI SOLOVEITCHIK Last week ATID hosted Rabbi, Scholar and Dean of the Rabbi Soloveitchik Institute, Jacob J. Schacter, as our 2003 scholar-in-residence. Rabbi Schacter enjoyed an intensive week of teaching and mentoring the ATID Fellows. On Wednesday, January 22nd Rabbi Schacter delivered the keynote at our Mid-Winter Conference on 'The Role of General Studies in Torah Education: Lessons from the Approach of Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik zt"l' to a standing-room-only audience of over 200 teachers and those concerned with Torah education. Respondents to Rabbi Schacter's talk included Rabbi Shimon Adler, Head of Religious Education in the Misrad HaHinukh, and Dr. Beverly Gribetz, of the ATID faculty and Principal, Evelina de Rothschild School, Jerusalem. Listen on line and view the packet of documents which accompany the lecture at www.atid.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Daniel Eidensohn <yadmoshe@...> Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2003 00:04:58 +0200 Subject: Making of a Godol - protesting misrepresentation of Rav HaRav Moshe Sternbuch shlita was shown the following posting on mail-jewish vol 38 #3 Sunday December 15 2002 from Prof. Marc Shapiro which states: "In addition, R. Moshe Sternbuch who has read the book [Making of a Godol], finds nothing wrong with it and has been telling people who ask that they certainly can read it.". HaRav HaGaon Moshe Sternbuch instructed Rabbi Yaakov Bear to correct this misrepresentation of his views and to make the following statement in his name. "HaRav Moshe Sternbuch shlita denies that he approves of the book and furthermore says that many of the parts of the book should not have been printed. For as it is written it is degrading of gedolim. He thinks the book should be corrected and it is not acceptable in its present form. Daniel Eidensohn ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: <Maylocks1@...> Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 19:53:44 EST Subject: Re: Making of a Godol - protesting misrepresentation of Rav Everything I reported was in R. Kamenetsky's name. I thought that was made clear. In addition, the man I sent it to also posted the following in my name. Many people have been contacting me about what you posted, so please post this as well. I don't know how many rabbanim support R.Kamenetsky, and he didn't give me many names. He just make it clear that there are those who agree that there is nothing wrong with the book. As I told you, however, I think I can speak for him when I say that he is not asserting that R. Sternbuch or other rabbanim agree with everything in the book. No doubt they too feel that certain formulations were wrong, should be worded differently, or even omitted. But they do not believe that because of this the book itself is pasul. Just because you have a few disagreements with an author does not mean that you should destroy him or his work. A few errors in judgment by Rabbi Kamenetsky does not make him a heretic! ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: <MJGerver@...> (Mike Gerver) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 19:42:17 EST Subject: Rav and Medinat Yisrael-- Part I Rabbi J. J. Shachter, director of the Soloveitchik Institute at Maimonides School in Boston, gave a talk motzei shabbat (Jan. 25) at Lechu Neranana in Raanana, about the relationship of Rav Soloveitchik to Medinat Yisrael, part of a lecture series on the occasion of the Rav's 10th yahrzeit and 100th birthday. I took notes, and will try to summarize here what he said. It was a beautiful talk. I know I missed some things, and may have misunderstood some things, and I have not asked him to review what I have written to see if it is accurate. I'm dividing this into two parts, so each e-mail will not be too long. Rabbi Shachter was introduced by Rabbi David Martin, head of the YU alumni association. He quoted R. Aaron Soloveitchik's hesped for the Rav, where he said that Chazal compare Torah to light, and said that this comparison is not only homiletic, but goes deeper. Light can be reflected, refracted, or diffracted. R. Chaim Soloveitchik, the Rav's grandfather, reflected Torah in pure form, as given at Sinai, back to Klal Yisrael. His son R. Moshe found a new medium in the US, and when light enters a different medium it refracts; R. Moshe refracted the light of Torah, bending it for use by a new society. His grandson the Rav diffracted the white light of Torah into its component colors. Rabbi Martin added that he thought that the Rav did all three, reflection and refraction as well as diffraction. He showed how to resolve apparent contradictions in Torah, especially in the Rambam, by breaking Torah down into its component parts, its logical categories, and showing that, when analyzed in this way, the contradictions did not exist. It is crucial to set up logical categories to truly understand the halacha, and make it relevant to our lives. The Rav once said that if he could have, he would have added a 14th principle to the Rambam's 13 principles: that Torah is relevant to our lives. (This thought was an important theme in R. Shachter's talk that followed.) The creation of the State of Israel, R. Martin went on to say, was one of the most important events since the Churban. It is difficult to understand this sugiya. The Rav helped to analyze its meaning. Rabbi Shachter began by saying that Rabbi Martin's love for the Rav, and his feelings of closeness, were obvious from his words, and thanked him for being the "shadchan" for this program. He also thanked Rabbi Stewart Weiss of the Jewish Outreach Center in Raanana, who had arranged for Rabbi Shachter's appearance here. Before getting into the topic of the talk, R. Shachter told a couple of stories from the Rav's talmidim about his shiur at YU. The former talmid who told the first story, I didn't catch who it was, said that the first time he attended the Rav's shiur, which ran from 1 to 4 in the afternoon, he made the mistake of having lunch first, but he never made that mistake again. The second story was from R. Velvil Wormeth (?), who once came to shiur unprepared. The talmidim used to take turns, in alphabetical order, saying the shiur, and they were up to R. Wormeth, who thought that the Rav did not know who he was. When the Rav called for R. Wormeth to say the shiur, he said "Oh, he's not here today, Rebbe!" to which the Rav replied, "OK, then you say the shiur!" R. Shachter said that he had not been in the Rav's shiur at YU, although his father had been the first one to get smicha from the Rav, and the Rav had been mesader kiddushin at R. Shachter's wedding, But he did not really get to know the Rav until 1973, when he started studying in the graduate program of the Rav's son-in-law, Rabbi Yitzchak Twersky, at Harvard. The Rav reflected on how he related to religious Zionism vs. how his forebears related to it. His great-grandfather R. Yosef Ber Soloveitchik, the Beit HaLevi, whom he was named after, died in 1892. Early on he was a supporter and follower of the Chibat Zion (or Hovevei Zion?) movement. But he turned against it because of its secular leadership, and the fact that he was unable to control the direction it was taking. He especially did not like its messianic overtones. The Rav felt the same way about reading messianic ideas into the State of Israel. The Beit HaLevi compared these messianic Zionists with the followers of Shabtai Zvi. His son, R. Chaim, was strongly opposed to Zionism. He was especially opposed to Mizrachi, and in a letter he wrote in 1899 to R. Yaakov Moshe Karpas, warned him against letting Mizrachi get established in Hungary, saying it had done great harm in Russia. His son R. Velvil, the Rav's uncle, had a close relationship with the Rav, they learned together when the Rav was growing up, and the Rav gave a hesped for him. But R. Velvil (who lived in Israel) was very opposed to the State. [Rabbi Israel Miller zt"l once told me that when he visited Israel shortly after it became independent, he visited R. Velvil, who asked him suspiciously "Did you come in honor of the State?" and would have thrown him out if he had answered "Yes." So Rabbi Miller replied, "We came in honor of Jerusalem," which seemed to satisfy him.-- MG] Why was the Rav different? The Rav was born in 1903 and lived in Pruzhin with his maternal grandfather until the age of 7. The family then lived in Brest-Litovsk, where the Rav was influenced by Chabad, and in 1920 moved to Warsaw, where his father R. Moshe became Rosh Yeshiva of Tachgemoli (?). This was a Mizrachi yeshiva, so already in 1920 R. Moshe was not as opposed to Zionism as R. Chaim and R. Velvil were. The Rav was in graduate school in Berlin, 1926-1930, moved to Vilna where he got married, returned to Berlin in 1931, and came to Boston in 1932. He had been offered a position at Skokie Yeshiva, but the position fell through when they did not have enough money, and his father found him a position in Boston. In 1935, the Rav was on a short list of candidates to become chief rabbi of Tel Aviv, and spent the summer of 1935 in Tel Aviv giving shiurim. In a hesped the Rav gave years later for Rav Gold (published in "Be-seter uva-gilui", Jerusalem, 1982), he recalled an evening he spent that summer visiting Rav Gold in Ramat Gan, and taking a walk with him around the orchards there, with stars and the moon shining, and the lights of Tel Aviv visible in the distance. In very beautiful and emotional terms, he quotes Rav Gold as saying that whoever does not feel the Shekhinah in the shining stars, and the clear and fragrant air, must be blind, and he describes Rav Gold picking up a small stone and kissing it, to fulfil the pasuk "Ki ratzu avadeicha et avaneicha ve-et afarah yechonenu." R. Shachter said that this remarkable hesped is the only place where the Rav published anything about his visit to Israel, although it obviously had a great influence on him. R. Shachter quoted from a letter that R. Moshe wrote to Rabbi Boimenger in Tel Aviv, to try to help the Rav get the job. (Published in "Sefer Hayovel Likvod Moreinu Hagaon Rabbi Yosef Dov HaLevi Soloveitchik Shlita," Tel Aviv, 5744, pages 621-623.) It is clear from the letter that R. Moshe is proud of the Rav's secular knowledge as well as his Torah knowledge. He also quotes R. Chaim as being impressed by something the Rav wrote as a boy. But there was a lot of party politics involved, and the Rav did not get the job, which went instead of Rabbi Amiel of Antwerp. The other losing candidate, Rabbi Herzog, shortly afterward (when Rav Kook died) became Chief Rabbi of Palestine. When R. Herzog died in 1959, several people pushed for the Rav to replace him as Chief Rabbi of Israel. Yediot published an interview with him by their American correspondent, a young reporter named Elie Wiesel. When asked if he was interested in the position, the Rav replied that he hadn't received an offer, he had only heard about it from the newspapers. Shortly after that, the Rav was stricken with cancer, and when he recovered, he said that he was not interested. He explained his reasons in letters, later published, that he wrote to R. Chaim Moshe Shapiro of Mafdal (the National Religious Party), an old friend from Warsaw, and to R. Reuven Katz of Petach Tikvah. The Rav always referred to himself as a "melamed," a teacher, and was derisive of what he called "ceremonial." He didn't want to get caught up in it, and in the politics of the postion. At first he thought he might be able to avoid it, but then realized that would be impossible. [My colleague from work, Yeshayahu Hollander, whose father was involved in trying to get the Rav appointed as Chief Rabbi, told me that he thought another consideration was that the Rav did not think that his wife would enjoy being Chief Rebbitzin.-- MG] [To be continued) Mike Gerver Raanana, Israel ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: <chips@...> Date: Sun, 26 Jan 2003 22:40:45 -0800 Subject: Re: Requirement of Saying blessings on Eclipses > From: Russell J Hendel <rjhendel@...> > I was shocked that a religious Rabbi could possibly override a Rabbinic > obligation to say a blessing because of a superstition (It is a bad > omen). This reminds me of Leah Gordons post(v38n31) that objected to > superstitiously associating names to causes of death. Well, I wasn't shocked and I disagreed with Leah, but it does seem odd that a bracha would be made on a rainbow but not an eclipse. The rainbow is supposed to remind us that we would be destroyed if not for the promise. -rp ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Ari Trachtenberg <trachten@...> Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 10:18:27 -0500 Subject: Re: Woman Gadol > From: Gil Student <gil_student@...> > I do not see why a woman cannot become a gedolah ba-Torah but I question > whether being a brilliant expert in Tanach is sufficient to being called > a gadol/gedolah ba-Torah. I would think that the term is reserved from > those who are masters of ALL AREAS of Torah. Of course not. Would you hesitate to call a world-class surgeon a gadola b'refuah (despite probably knowing very little about, say, infectuous diseases)? or Albert Einstein a gadol b'mada (despite probably knowing very little about biology)? I would argue that being a master of any one area of Torah, and especially Tanach (which relies very heavily on oral Torah), would give a person the stature and reputation for having a deep understanding of Judaism, at the level of "gadol/a". In the case of Nehama Leibowitz, my personal feeling is that she stayed away from g'mara because of the social taboos at the time. Had she given opinions on g'mara as well, some people would have considered her a rebel and not valued her opinions as much (is his not what happened to Blu Greenberg, whom I would consider a gedola ba-Torah as well?). Best, Ari Trachtenberg, Boston University http://people.bu.edu/trachten mailto:<trachten@...> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
End of Volume 38 Issue 46