מובן מאליו שמי שלא זכה להבין את תורתו של מרן הרב קוק זצ"ל, לא יכול להיחשב כאחד מגדולי התורה שבדור. הוא יכול להיות מומחה ובקיא בפרטים רבים, בצד הטכני של ההלכה והאגדה. אבל לא ייתכן שיהיה ממש גדול בתורה.
וגם בקרב אלה שהבינו את דברי הרב קוק יש שתי מדרגות עיקריות. יש שמקבלים את הוראותיו הכלליות ביחס למקומה של ארץ ישראל בזמן הזה, זמן של קיבוץ גלויות ואתחלתא דגאולה. וכן את הדרכותיו ביחס למדע ועבודה, וביחס העקרוני ליהודים שעזבו תורה אבל הם מקושרים לערכי העם והארץ או לערכים אוניברסאליים (ביחס לפורקי עול רגילים כבר נכתב בעבר רבות). ותלמידי חכמים אלו זוכים ומתחברים נפשית למדרגה השלישית על ידי ההזדהות עם תורתו ודמותו המאירה.
ויש יחידי סגולה שמעמיקים יותר בהבנת הרעיונות, שמאירים ממש את המציאות, וסוללים דרך לגאולה על ידי אור הדרכת התורה.
יש להעיר שבין זקני הרבנים מהדור הקודם, שגם הציבור החרדי מחשיבם כגדולי התורה, היו רבים שזכו לקבל השפעה חשובה ממרן הרב קוק זצ"ל. ואף שלא המשיכו את דרכו בהנהגת הציבור, הם קיבלו כמה מרעיונותיו ונותרו מעריציו ומכבדי דמותו עד יומם האחרון. וביניהם: הרב פרנק זצ"ל, הרב אויערבאך זצ"ל, הרב אלישיב זצ"ל, הרב ולדנברג זצ"ל. וכן יבדל"א הרב עובדיה יוסף שליט"א.
Without commenting on the perhaps slight גוזמה in the thesis, I would like to add Rav Hutner to the list [shhhh, don't tell anyone].
ReplyDeleteIn one of the ma'amarim from R' Ya'akov Shapira on this week's parsha (on the Merkaz haRav site) he calls R' Hutner a talmid "b'itkasya" of R' Kook. He quotes R' Hutner as saying that it was R' Kook who gave him a derech in the Maharal. I recall either reading or hearing that R' Hutner once said that he and R' Kook shared the same shoresh haneshoma.
ReplyDeleteOf course all this must be swept under the rug. Wouldn't want people to get the wrong impression and think the tzionim know how to learn a little.
It's no secret. The tzionim do know how to learn a little, compared to the Chareidi/Yeshivishe Gedolim.
ReplyDeleteIn one corner, assuming the mantle of decisor regarding who is a gadol hador, Rav Melamed. In the other corner, assuming the mantle of the power to measure lomdus, Rav Eisenberg.
ReplyDeleteI recall that my Rosh Yeshiva, Rav Ruderman, was insulted by one of his talmidim for being a tzioni, about fifty years ago. That particular talmid showed his disdain by sitting in the Rosh Yeshiva's chair publicly. Coincidentally, one of the yeshiva building roofs was being repaired at the time. The next day the police were called, anonymously, to find this particular young man tied to a lamp post, tarred and feathered.
The bochurim who redecorated the apikores went on to become major roshei yeshiva. The recipient of the new plumage went on to become a major figure in the Agudah.
My personal philosophy [which varies depending if my kippa is black velvet or srugah at the time] is: pass the popcorn.
Lomdus I can measure. I can tell the level of a person's lomdus after listening to him or reading him in under thirty seconds. You can, too. Don't tell me you can't discern any qualitative difference between the Avodas Halevi and the Chidushei Basra and Reb Boruch Ber and the Steipler and Reb Chaim Telzer and Reb Ahron Kotler and the Aruch Laner.
ReplyDeleteBut as far as psak, I certainly cannot judge. I can't pasken my way out of a paper bag, though I often do pasken when I'm too embarrassed to admit that I don't know what I'm talking about. My opinion is merely a quote from my local universally respected gadol batorah, RSF, who, privately, said about the Tzioni poskim that there is only one whose quality of yediah and havana is such that he can be relied on.
My personal philosophy is "Nothing under 150°"
Let's not forget Reb Meir Simcha and almost anyone else. Can you tell the difference?
ReplyDeleteI think its understandable for R Melamed, whose torah personality has been shaped in large part by the teachings of r kook, to say that - and I respect the fact that he feels so transformed by r kook's teachings to say such a strong statement. Objectively speaking, I think its 100% not true. I'm sure some of the students of RYBS would say the same of RYBS, and again, while I tremendously respect the devotion to his teachings and life values that such a statement would reflect, it simply isn't true. There are many derachim in torah, and the mesorah didnt go through r kook alone. A person can be a gadol coming from an entirely different path.
ReplyDeleteThe statement probably has more shock value than truth, but it reveals the degree to which R' Kook's torah influenced R' Melamed and other talmidim. In one of the shiurim he has on Orot R' Melamed describes his reading his first piece from R' Kook as a teenager and how he felt his eyes opened -- this was someone who speaks to him. The students of RYBS probably feel the same about RYBS; the students of R' Ahron Kotler the same about R' Aharon. It's like the gemara in Sanhedrim where the question of Moshiach's name is raised and everyone gives his rebbi's name as an answer. That being said, there are very very few (are there any?) 20th century talmidei chachamim who impacted Jewish thought the way R' Kook has. Barzilai/Eliezer - of all the names you mention, aside from shiurim on gemara, none of them, for all their genius, came up with a new sweeping worldview that was a "pesach" through which to tackle the problems of the dor. We can get all Nefesh haChaim-ish and talk about how a great shiur in Bava Kamma influences the olamos ha'elyonim and makes the universe a better place, but that's not the same as formulating a derech in the here and now that people can latch onto for philosophical guidance and help addressing the challenges that have arisen from the return to Eretz Yisrael and the transformation in Jewish life it has brought about.
ReplyDeleteDisagree re the Meshech Chochma. He did have a unique derech which was overridden by R' Chaim Brisker with the assistance of the Chofetz Chaim. E.g., rabbonim learning Russian. [As he is reputed to have said, "What's the big deal? It took me five minutes."]
DeleteExcellent, excellent tzushtell to the Gemara in Sanhedrin 98b.
ReplyDelete