avakesh

Academic studies and Torah

I received this query from a very bright seeker. I decided, with permission, to share both the question and the answer on the blog.

Question

"I see that on your site you address many issues regarding Biblical scholarship, as well as academic Talmudic scholarship. My goal has been to make the yesodei ha-das (G-d, Torah and Man (spirituality)) real to me, pashut, to have a strong foundation,well planted roots. I have grown in my emuna in Hashem and in the soul...and Torah knowledge. I have long struggled with the areas of modern scholarship, and I have discussed it with many knowledgeable rabbis and religious professors. But I find that being osek in these matters lowers my spiritual state.Besides for any hadracha you could give me in dealing with these issues intellectually, how do you deal with the spiritual. I feel on a much lower spiritual level when I read these things. I also struggle with balancing the investigation of the foundations (philosophy, secular scholarship etc.) with the investigation of the details, and the details of the details etc. (Talmudic study). But yet, I feel that I must; I have been afraid of the scholars for too long. Pachad is the worst midda. With much appreciation..."

Response

Thank you for asking this question, a question I not infrequently receive.

There is no question that indulging in academic scholarship can be bad for one's spiritual health. Experience bears this out. The real question, therefore is, what benefits might there be in academic study of Bible and Talmud and , whether they justify the investment of time that can otherwise be devoted to traditional Torah study, and if it has positive religious value, how can the risks be attenuated?

The foundation for the inquiry must be that academic studies do not have a value greater than traditional Torah study, for nothing can be more dangerous and false than such an assumption. Being familiar with the modern methods of Bible study does not mean better understanding of Tanach than that of someone who only knows Rashi and Ramban. What is a small increment of knowledge worth in front the most immensely rich, deep and powerful book ever written. Neither is there room for self congratulatory feeling of smug superiority over the  old-time (and behind the times) talmidei chachamim that one sometimes finds among academic scholars. Academic studies are only justified when they take their place in the armamentarium of an advanced  Torah scholar - as one method among others. R. Hildesheimer, for example, was known for his ability to quickly assess his audience and deliver a lecture exactly befitting his listeners. To Hungarians he gave a pilpul in the style then current in that land, to the Lithauanians he spoke as a Litvishe lamdan and to Germans, he presented an academic discourse in the style of Wissenschaft vom Judentum.

Why then read academic writers at all? Well, because so many areas of Torah study are not covered in the traditional curriculum or lie in manuscripts and obscure texts that one cannot locate and has no teacher to explain.

You must not believe that academic inquiry uncovers the Truth, only that it makes available a slice of reality. You get out what you put in.

Remember that it tends to obtain results that befit its style of inquiry. Scientific approaches are reductionist. They employ the historical method, and a powerful method it is,  and attempt to separate Torah into various layers, usually based on the historic period, cultural milieu and assumptions, or surrounding intellectual trends. This is not the way of the Torah, or Judaism for that matter. We, Jews, are unifiers, lumpers, not splitters. Just like the world itself is Unity within apparent multiplicity, so also all of Torah is one. A contemporary scholar can offer an explanation that resolves a contradiction within an ancient text, that then can be used to explain an ever older Biblical passage. Torah is one, without layers or sublevels. Thus, the academic method is merely one way of analyzing the evidence of the Tradition; in fact, it will often produce results that are contrary to what the Tradition itself teaches.

Is there a value to Academic study? I think yes, but only under certain conditions.

1. Do not engage in it until you have filled your belly with Shas and Poskim. This is because otherwise you cannot evaluate whether the academician is collating secondary sources, misreading the text, misapplying a flashy thought while overlooking the obvious meaning, or is a plain am haaretz. Why should you be thrown by the words of an am haaretz? His language may be polished, his idiom sharp and his delivery impeccable but he may be nothing more than an ignoramus, and you do not want to be swayed by an ignoramus.

2. Do not engage in it until you yourself possess and master some academic discipline. This I say because there are certain tricks of the trade that an academics know, that are used to transition between facts and conclusions. Without a thorough training in academia, without having played the game yourself, you will miss these devices and scribe more validity to the conclusions than is warranted. Especially watch out for “is would stand to reason”, "therefore", “consequently", "it is more likely than not' etc. These examples you can be taught to identify and suspect; others are more refined and even more elegant. If you do not own an area of inquiry, do not wield perfect English and understand the art of rhetoric, you will be at a disadvantage when a false elegant presentation undermines your faith based on nothing.

3.Fideism, the position that truth is established by faith and choice rather than by reason, is a necessary component were you to involve yourself in academic study. A belief that Truth is established by mystical rather than rational means, would also suffice to protect you. No amount of philosophy can sway a prophet.

4. Finally, as Menachem Ecktein wrote in his small and wonderful book, Visions of a Compassionate World, philosophy (read science) is nothing more than an attempt to come closer to God, using the means at one’s disposal. Some people have only their brain because their other facilities remain underdeveloped. At the center of their spiritual quest is their reason, unaware that the very criticism and inquiry to which they subject G-d’s word is an expression of their deep longing for it.  Seek, we must seek, Hashem through reason, through feeling, through every means at our limited disposal. If you do so, what can the academic method do to you? Academia is not the whole story, it is barely even a part of the story. If you remember this, you will be safe.

Does academic study of Torah have value? Yes, some!

Should you engage in I? Possibly at some future time, probably not now, not yet, not until the conditions above have been satisfied.
All roads lead to Jerusalem, only some can lead you to wander for a while.

Should I, the writer of these words, engage in it. No, not anymore. B’H this knowledge has served me and others well. However, that which I have gained already, I must also not deny. I must use everything that Hashem gave me, all the blind blundering in the valleys of Life, its broken paths,for the Glory of my Creator. May Hashem lead us in the path of Truth and open our eyes in His Torah and may He have nachas from all his children.

Our children - ourselves

A Simple Jew was kind to host a Q&A with me on Chinuch.

For easier reference I also post it here.

You once commented that your children are "a mirror in which you see yourself - both in behaviors they provoke in you and in the character tendencies, strengths and defects that they inherit from their parents." How has seeing the reflection in this mirror influenced you to make any changes in your life?

It is often said that children are a gift. They bring us immeasurable pleasure, nachas, and fulfillment. There is no greater gift than being able to give to and stand by a soul in formation, to be able to contribute and shape, to give and to transmit to our children that which has been entrusted and transmitted to us. Humans resemble Hashem when occupied in this task.

However, children also challenge us.They are small and vulnerable, dependent and trusting; also selfish and exasperating. They are often impatient and demanding. They have their own small agendas and they care nothing for ours. Their occasional acts of unexpected generosity can bring great pleasure - because they are so unexpected. In so many ways they tempt us to resort to controlling them to our own ends, and if we do so, we have failed as parents, as human beings, as servants of Hashem. We have taken from them the freedom to which they are entitled and in doing so have surrendered some of our own. Of course, understanding of limits is something that we must ingrain in them but because that is a part of their growth and not of our convenience.

These little people that God gave us to cherish and to grow must not be controlled. They must be tended, watered and planted. Parents are stewarts. It is precisely in the daily acts of unselfish giving, of transcendance of the self, that we are given an opportunity to grow without measure. Every time that you do not snap, do not threaten, do not manipulate their developing minds and trusting souls because it suits and benefits you, you rise - and opportunites for growth are there daily, constantly, unremitttingly. Truly, there is no greater opportunity to grow beyond self-interest than by taking care of small, dependent and trusting little beings according to their needs and not ours.

However, there is another aspect to this. Our children are often like us. Our personal failings and predispositions, things that we deny or choose to ignore within ourselves, stare at us, irritate us, confront us every day. Impatience, indolence, strong headedeness, you name it, often has genetic roots. Some parents easily relate to a child that is like their spouse but detest another one, who is  like themselves. Not only is this destructive and... well, evil; it is also a missed opportunity for self-transcendance. How can we help our children develop and overcome faults that we deny in ourselves? Only by coming clean about them! Thus, the greatest gift that we can give our kids is truth.

When I said that out children are mirrors of ourselves, I meant two things. First, they put us to daily tests and constant challenge to rise above our interests and toward theirs. Secondly, and even more importantly, as their faces trustingly turn toward ours, every day and in every interaction, the soul that is looking from their eyes into yours is your own.

In honor of Purim Koton

by Zalman Kleinman, copyright held by artist's estate

Physical and Spiritual: Coin of fire

Rashi in v.13 of his commentary to parashas Ki Tisa quotes Tanchuma that Moshe found it difficult to understand the nature of the half-shekel coin which was used to take the count described in the parsha. Therefore, Hashem showed him a coin of fire.

What does this mean?

I saw an interesting approach in the Gutnick chumash. The Lubavitcher Rebbe explained that Fire represents that one of the four elements that always strives to rise upward, whereas a coin is the very epitome of the hard, defined and heavy. A coin of fire is the melding of the physical and spiritual and what Moshe could not understand is how spiritual and physical can possibly be joined. In response, Hashem showed him a coin of fire, telling him that indeed it is necessary that spiritual and physical be joined together as one entity.

Taking this a bit farther, we realize that a coin in Hebrew is that which has been stamped and impressed. The root "T'B'A" means impressing one object into another - it signifies sinking, pressing into, driving one thing into another. Thou didst blow with Thy wind, the sea covered them; they sank as lead in the mighty waters (Ex. 15:10).

The problem that most of us have, that I at least encounter, is how to mesh the physical and the spiritual. We, and in truth all of Creation, desire to be close to Hashem but the inspiration is fleeting, physicality all pervasive, and backsliding constant.  The Midrash tells us that the fire of spirituality needs to be in pressed into the grossness of the material, that fire can settle into the substance even of metal and that giving, in this case money but in the wider sense of oneself, is the way to accomplish it.

But how exactly is this done? A parallel midrash explains that Moshe also found the design on the Menorah difficult and he was shown the Menorah of Fire (Rashi Exodus 29:40). (In general, Moshe found three things difficult, until G-d showed them to him with His finger: Menorah, HaChodesh (the new Moon) and (creeping insects (Menachot 29a. See also Mechilta Bo 12:2. Sifrei 8:4.)”

Here also I cite the explanation found in the Gutnick Chumash in the section Terumah. The Rambam's depiction of the Menorah curiously shows cups, the geviim of the candelabra as pointing downwards. Thus there are two kinds of cups on the Menorah - the ones on its top into which oil and wicks are placed and the decorative ones that flow down on its branches and trunk. The Rebbe explained that this signifies that the light and the fire of the spiritual can and must flow downwards from top to bottom, so as to envelope and include all parts of Man.

The meaning of this then is - do not allow the fire of inspiration and the flame of spirituality float up into Heaven above and away from you. Harness it, capture it, direct it downwards and impress it upon the unwilling matter of your body, so that, as a coin, the cold, inert metal begins to vibrate and pulse with the fire of Spirituality and Great Love.

Kiddush Man Trailer

"GLORY" fills the Mishkan

Copyright by Ted Larsen

Avos 1: 4: Yose ben Yoezer, the man of clusters

Yose ben Yoezer, the man of Yoezer and Yose ben Yochanan, the man of Yerushalaim received from (him) them. R. Yose said: Your house should be a house of meeting for the sages, and roll in the dust of their feet, and drink with thirst their words.

These tow early sages, R. Yose of Yoezer and R. Yose of Jerusalem initiated a new period in the life of the nation. Not only were they the first to serve as a pair, their appointment also ushered in the first sustained disagreement among the Sages (Chagiga 16). It arose over the question whether the laying of hands on the heads of the sacrificial animals is permitted on feast-days.

We do not know much about R. Yose but some facts about him have come down to us.  He appears to have been unusually even handed in his positions. We know that he was considered lenient in his approach to halacha (Eduyos 7:4). On the other hand, to prevent Jews from settling beyond Palestine he declared all heathen countries "unclean" (Shab. 46a). He declared also glass utensils "unclean". Yose ben Joezer was distinguished for his piety, and is called "the pious of the priesthood" ("hasid shebi-kchunnah", Chagiga 18b). He was probably among the sixty pious men who, at the instigation of the high priest Alcimus, the son of his sister, were crucified by the Syrian general Bacchides (I Macc. vii. 16) in 161 BCE.

The Midrash reports the following dialog between this Alcimus and R. Yose ben Joezer while the latter was on the way to execution:

Alcimus: "See the profit and honors that have fallen to my lot in consequence of what I have done, whilst thou, for thy obstinacy, hast the misfortune to die as a criminal."

Yose, quietly: "if such is the lot of those who anger God, what shall be the lot of those who accomplish His will?"

Alcimus: "Is there any one who accomplished His will more than thou?"

Yose: "If this is the end of those who accomplish His will, what awaits those who anger Him?"

On this Alcimus was seized with remorse and committed suicide and disobeyed his Greek masters, therefore dying as a martyr.

R. Yose ben Joezer left a son whom he had disinherited for bad conduct(B"B 133b).

The appellation "man of clusters" is quite unusual among Talmudic masters and might give some insight into R. Yose (or Yosef as other texts call him, Meiri in Shalsheles Hakabbolo). Although Rashi in Temura 16 b translates it s as, " ...in Torah, in the Fear of Heaven and acts of kindness", other interpretations surely suggest themselves. One, for example might focus on the structure of R. Yose's teaching. Whereas most (not all) other Sages left us tripartite statements, each of which parts constitutes an unrelated or only tenuously connected detail, both R. Yose ben Yoezer and R. Yochanan present three facets of the SAME teaching. We will discuss R. Yose ben Yoezer soon. For now it should suffice to point out that R. Yose ben Yochanan takes us programmatically through implementation and pitfalls of setting up a House of Cheesed. The poor are not always the most upstanding  members of society and in a House of Chessed one cannot segregate by sex. There must be a policy on how to avoid mixing of genders and R. Yose man of Yerushalaim, in his three bullets, provides us with guidance on all the aspects of such a house.

Another approach. In the Middle Ages, especially in Italy, "man of clusters" referred to a man who combined Torah knowledge with familiarity with secular sciences and arts ( for an example of this usage see Shu"t"t Chacham Tsvi, 18). To bring all the facts about R. Yose ben Yoezer in alignment, we might conjecture that he was of the last generation that could rightfully delve into the Torah of Moshe and be familiar with the multifaceted achievement of the Hellenistic civilization. After Antiochus, this was no longer possible, much as after Hitler, German culture and Hirschian style Orthodoxy no longer mesh together. Can one now scarcely imagine a Shabbos afternoon spend in reading Hitler Imach Shemo to one's family as R.. Hilderschemier was wont to do?

When R. Yose ben Yoezer died by the hand of the Hellenists, men of "clusters" ceased. At that time they declared: 'Cursed be the one who teaches his son Greek wisdom' [Baba Kama 82b]".

Midrashic Core

Exegetical Motifs.

Modern detailed study of Midrash must take note of the concept of exegetical motifs. A motif is a thematic unit that may combine, double or reconstitute in different Midrashic passages to produce a variety of midrashic passages that resemble each other but also vary in significant ways. These exegetical units initially explain a textual or theological peculiarity; however, in time, they affect and serve as models for later,  both Midrashic and pshat based interpretation. "Motifs, and individual elements belonging to them, often become combined or harmonized with other motifs…behind it usually stands an attempt by the exegete to reconcile two traditions, both of which he considered authoritative.. [1]".

When combined with the historical method, there emerges a powerful tool to understand unfolding and relationship of various Midrashic passages. Historical methods have unfortunately often been used of pull down and destroy and they have not enjoyed full trust or acceptance among traditional scholars. An exception has perhaps been in the filed of Mishnaic studies, where the existence of the proto- mishna, the so-called mishna rishona, is universally accepted and attempts to reconstruct this original mishna are tolerated by all segments of Torah community.

Close study of halachic midrash leads me to the conclusion that Mekhilta and other midrashim were also built around an ancient core of pshat interpretation. This core may have been taught and committed to memory in schools and academies together with the written Torah text. This core consisted of short explanatory statements, used expression "shene'emar" and was passed on orally. It dates to very early within the Second Temple period, perhaps to the time of Anshei Kneses Hagdola, perhaps even to the First Temple period [2]. These statements were subsequently expanded, often with words "vken hu omer" and are in a different style than the core. It is in this later strata that we find disagreements among Tannaim. If so, we should expect the different ancient exegetical motifs to also be found in other early midrashic collections, such as Pirkei D'Rabbi Eliezer, and they may turn up in expanded version, alone or side by side, or in a reconciled version in later Midrashic collections or in the Talmud.

Let us look at an example.

Between me and the Children of Israel a sign it is forever, for in seven days Hashem made heaven and earth and on the seventh day he ceased and rested (Shemos 31,17).

There is both an exegetical and theological difficulty in this verse. We must explain the deeply private and personal connotation of "between me and Children of Israel". We also need to explain in what way are Gentiles excluded from this private "sign". Are they unable to take on some Sabbath observances? If, as we know historically, they have done so to some extent, in what way is it then a sign solely between G-d and the Jews. The first Midrashic passage that we cite understands this "sign" as signifying an act of covenant, and it was private because it was in secret; the second as an actual handing over to the Jews of something that other nations cannot access, even if they know about the Shabbos and attempt also to observe it.

Between me and Children of Israel - and not the nations of the world (Mekhilta).

This very short phrase clearly belongs to the core. It appears to have been subsequently interpreted in two different ways. Some midrashim see it as a halachic or aggadic proscription of a non-Jew keeping Shabbos. Others understand it as a statement that the act of giving the commandment of Shabbos was originally performed in secret, in order not to allow the nations to copy it in their own rituals or religions [3].

The Holy One Blessed Be He said to Israel : I gave Shabbos between me and them…blessing, holiness and rest for Me and them.. (Pirkei D'Rabbi Eliezer, 18) [4]

This passage proposes that Hashem gave blessing, holiness and rest only to the Jews who keep Shabbos. Were a non-Jew attempt to observe Sabbath, he or she would not experience these things. In this fashion it is a sign between God and Jews exclusively .

The Talmud in Betsah 16a attempts to reconcile these two disparate traditions. I do not mean to imply that its reconciliation was not present at inception; quite possibly the later source simply reports how the two traditions were reconciled already at the time that the early midrashim were composed (and we have seen examples of this in phenomena previously).

R. Yochanan said in the name of R, Shimon Bar Yochai: All commandments that the Holy One Blessed Be He gave to Israel, He gave to them in public except for Shabbos which he gave to them in secret, as it says, "Between Me and Children of Israel".

If so, Gentiles would not be punished for (for not accepting it, Rashi)!

(No,) He informed them about Shabbos but He did not inform them about its reward.

Another answer: He also informed them about its reward but He did not inform them of the extra soul (Neshama Yeseira).

This Talmudic passage combines the two traditions. It first cites the tradition that Shabbos was given in secret, to Jews but not to nations of the world (Motif #1). In its second answer it brings in the motif #2 - that the essence of the 'sign' was that Gentiles cannot participate in "blessing, holiness and rest".

The concept of exegetical motif must be used carefully and cautiously and with full attention paid to Sinaitic origins of the Oral Law. Those caveats aside, it can be a powerful toll that enables to systemize various related Midrashic passages around several basic themes that often can be shown to have their origin in early Tannaitic midrash.

---

1 J. Kugel, In Potiphars's house: The interpretative life of Biblical tests, Harvard University Press, 1990, p. 256.

2 There are many verses in Chronicles, for example, that are repetitions of verses from Kings or Samuel but with a word or few words added. These may represent traditional oral explanations of these books that were ultimately committed to writings under the influence of Ruach Hakodesh (for status of Divrei Hayomim vis-à-vis Ruach Hakodesh, see Pnei Moshe and Amudei Hayerushalmi to the very end of 1st chapter of Yerushalmi Bava Basra).

3 Torah Shelema Tisa, 96 quotes a number of examples of such midrashim.

4 As the Radal points out in his introduction to PRD"E, it is the second work of Oral Law to have been committed to writing (the first one was Megillas Ta'anis), significantly before the time of the Mishna.

The mishna melody

"Rockin’ out” and “Shteiging” are two concepts that one would not expect to go hand in hand. A shiur combining Torah power and power chords would no doubt be considered something of an anomaly in many yeshivas. Yes, many rabbis, from Shlomo Carlebach to Shmuel Skaist, have used their music to inspire Am Yisrael, and bring them closer to Judaism, but few musicians have utilized their skills in order to instill educational material into their works. The Mishna Project, with their album “Berachos 1-3,” are in fact trying to bridge rock n’ roll with the classroom."

Comment: The gemoro (and Tosafos) in the end of Megila mentions that there was a traditional melody for Mishna. This was presumably to facilitate memorization.

"If one reads [Scripture] without chant or studies [Mishnah] without melody, of him is it written, 'I gave them laws that were not good' (Ezekiel 20:25).

In fact, I recall that Tiferes YIsroel ( I dont remember where) suggests that this is the reason why some mishanyos were truncated, "chesurai mechsora", so as to a fit into a melody.

Some old manuscripts of the Mishnah include cantillation marks similar to those in the Bible. There is no surviving system for the musical rendition of these.

These are messianic time - the return of the Mishna melody?

Faith can be simple

Praying with Lior  is about a child with Down's syndrome who PRAYS.

  http://www.prayingwithlior.com/index.htm

....a film with humor, pathos, mysticism, and love about the impact of one youngster's spirituality.