103 Rav Yitzhaḳ Arieli and his Disappearance from 1 the Circles of Rav Kook and Mercaz HaRav This is continuation of “Historical Revisionism by the Families of Rav Kook’s Disciples: Three Case Studies,” Hakiraḥ 24. From the estate of the author, HY”D. By: EITAM HENKIN* Introduction: Rav Arieli’s Place in the Rav Kook Chronicles At the end of 2006, the Religious Zionist press erupted in protest over censorship by descendants of Rav Yitzhak Arieli, one of Rav A.Y. Kook’s greatest disciples and the mashgiah ̣ in Yeshivat Mercaz HaRav for many years.1These descendants published an updated version of their grandfa- * Translated from the Hebrew by Michael Appel. Hakiraḥ thanks Eliezer Brodt for his involvement with this article. 1 Note from the author’s parents: This article is a slightly abridged continuation of the article “Historical Revisionism by the Families of Rav Kook’s Disciples” that was published in Asif, Vol. 3, 2016, pp. 1138–1156. (Translator’s note: avail- able in English at http://hakirah.org/Vol24Henkin.pdf). The author, HY”D, worked on the present article in several stages, but we were not privileged to see his finished work. We decided to publicize the material as is, because it is of much interest. From the author’s words, it appears that he intended to delve further into the details of the split in the Orthodox community in Israel into two separate camps (as he indicated in the Asif article), and to draw conclusions about the aspects of Rav Kook’s legacy that the proponents of the various po- sitions sought to foster in his Yeshiva. The author’s computer contained a file on the first topic, the split in the Orthodox community. We have appended this material to the end of the current article as an addendum. We did not find ma- terial related to the second topic, that of the varying aspects of Rav Kook’s leg- acy that the proponents of the various positions sought to foster in the yeshiva. This work will have to be left to the reader. In the section entitled “Leadership by the time of his death at age 31, had authored ,הי ד" Rav Eitam Henkin over 50 articles and three books. He was renowned both for his halachic writings and his mastery of the byways of the rabbinic world of the 19th ,on laws of insect infestation לכם יהיה לאכלה and 20th centuries. He wrote hiddushiṃ and be’urim on dinie Shabbat of the Mishnah Berura, as―אש תמיד well as a soon-to-be-published historical work on Arukh Ha-Shulhaṇ . His on Hoḷ Ha-Moed, Sukkot 5776 ,הי ד" murder, together with his wife Naama was a great loss to both the Torah and academic communities. Ḥ akirah 25 © 2018 104 : Hakirah,̣ the Flatbush Journal of Jewish Law and Thought ther’s work Einayim La-Mishpat on Tractate Berakhot, and chose to elimi- nate the final section of the Introduction in which Rav Arieli described his reverence for Rav Kook and his own involvement in the founding and administration of Yeshivat Mercaz HaRav over many years. Moreover, the descendants added their own biographical introduction of their grand- father that completely ignored any ties between him and Rav Kook or Mercaz HaRav. “But this was the focus of his life!” protested Rav Eliezer Melamed in his weekly column in Be-Sheva.2 Similar indignation was expressed by Rav Neriah Guttel, who called upon readers of Ha- Tzofeh to flood the publisher with complaints and even to boycott the book.3 The protests were, of course, justified. Censorship of facts and revi- sionist history are completely unjustified actions, especially when they im- pugn the image of Rav Kook for ideological purposes. However, on the other hand, we must clarify: Did Rav Arieli receive his due recognition in the historical consciousness of the Mercaz HaRav circles and those who continued the path of Rav Kook? of Yeshivat Mercaz HaRav in the Generation after Rav Kook” (the second to last section), the author collected several passages that it seems he was preparing to analyze. In this section, as well, we have not completed the work but have added words or connecting sentences. All of our additions in this chapter and in the addendum appear in square brackets (except for very minor stylistic edits), in order to distinguish between these small additions and the author’s work. In the rest of the article, the enclosures in square brackets are by the author himself, with one addition of our own, in Note 3. 2 Revivim, B-Sheva, Volume 207, 7 Elul, 5766 (2006) 3 “A Protest for the Rav’s Honor” (Hebrew) in Ha-Tzofeh: Musaf Sofrim U-Sefarim, 1 Elul 5766 (2006). An even greater omission by several orders of magnitude was made in the edition of Einayim La-Mishpat published in Jerusalem in 1989 (and again in 1994). In it, the publisher erased almost half (!) of the Introduction to Kiddushin in order to omit any reference to Rav Kook and Mercaz HaRav (Even though a letter from Rav Charlap appears at the end of the book, in which the connection between Rav Arieli and Rav Kook and his yeshiva was not omit- ted. Also, the volume on Berakhot left this part intact.) It is surprising that the uproar was raised only in connection with this small omission from the Berakhot volume, almost two decades later! [Addition from the author’s parents: In his article in Asif 3, page 1142, the author showed that the omission was done by Rav Arieli himself, and even suggested a reason for it: “A more plausible expla- nation is that Rav Arieli wanted this volume to be accepted in the growing com- munity of yeshivot and institutions that did not look kindly upon volumes that emphasized the persona of Rav Kook.” Later on, we learned that, indeed, mar- keting considerations were behind this omission.] R. Yitzhak Arieli’s Disappearance from the Circles of Rav Kook and Mercaz HaRav : 105 Let’s take, for example, a comprehensive article on the history of Mer- caz HaRav by Rav Yitzhak Shilat, who learned in the yeshiva during the 1960s.4 In the article, Rav Shilat goes through all the important personal- ities who took part in the yeshiva’s founding, starting with the founder himself, Rav Kook and the brief era of Rav Avraham Aaron Burstein (the Gaon of Tavrig), through the tenure of Rav Charlap as Rosh Yeshiva after Rav Kook, ending with his own days in the yeshiva under the stewardship of Rav Zvi Yehuda Kook and, at his side, Rav Shalom Natan Raanan the menahel, and Rav David Cohen (the Nazir) as the senior Ra”m. Also stud- ying there at the time were young rabbis including Rav Mordechai Frum, Rav Shaul Yisraeli, and Rav Avraham Shapira. Rav Shilat even mentions the well-known story in which Rav Kook invited Rav Shimon Shkop, head of the yeshiva in Grodno, to serve as head of Mercaz HaRav,5 and also mentions additional young students from the time of Rav Kook. Only one person is conspicuously absent from this version of the yeshiva’s his- tory: Rav Yitzhak Arieli. Professor Rav Neriah Guttel did the same thing. One of the most well-known researchers in our generation of Rav Kook’s writings and teachings writes the following in his introduction to his book Mekhutavei Ra’aya: Four men continued ‘the Path [of Rav Kook].’ They were constantly in his close orbit and were appointed in his lifetime to positions in the yeshiva he founded. It seems that nobody would argue that these four are: His son, Rav Zvi Yehuda; Rav Yaakov Moshe Char- lap; his son-in-law, Rav Shalom Natan Raanan; and Rav David Co- hen (the Nazir). With all due respect to others who were close to Rav Kook, the personal appointments of these four, his entrustment 4 “Ha-Mahapekha Ha-‘Mercaz’-it,” Nekuda, Vol. 181, Heshvan 5755 (1995), pp. 20– 24. It is clear that Rav Shilat’s descriptions of personalities in the yeshiva before his own time were greatly influenced by Rav Zvi Yehuda Kook and from things he said (or did not say) about them. As an additional example of the historical awareness of the yeshiva’s students during the latter half of Rav Zvi Yehuda’s tenure, we can point to the chapter dedicated to Mercaz HaRav in the volume “Rabbeinu—Harav Zvi Yehuda Ha-Cohen Kook ZT”L,” edited by Rav Ze’ev Neu- man, published by Rav Shlomo Aviner, Jerusalem 2004 (pp. 69–84). It contains specific entries for Rav Charlap, the Nazir, Rav Raanan, and even Rav Frum— but nobody else. 5 In his article “Ad Asher Emtza Makom b-Mishkenot l-Avir Ya‘akov,” Ha-Maayan, Tishrei 5770 (2010), pp. 79–96, my good friend Shemaryah Gershuni proved that although Rav Shkop was actually interested in the position, his request was denied by the yeshiva’s leadership! 106 : Hakirah,̣ the Flatbush Journal of Jewish Law and Thought to them of his writings and his yeshiva, and even their ‘self-abnega- tion’ to his persona, speaks for itself.6” And Rav Yitzhak Arieli? What happened to him? The question is astounding: Why wasn’t Rav Arieli worthy in Rav Guttel’s eyes to be included alongside the others on the list of those who ‘continued the path,’ those who were constantly in Rav Kook’s closest inner circle? After all, he insists on the specific criteria he mentions. And even if one could argue with some of them,7 there is no doubt that Rav Arieli fulfills them just as much as the others, as will be proven shortly.