Books Community, Covenant and Selected Letters and Communications, Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik The Rav was so complex a figure that different individuals perceived him in different ways. We therefore thought it appropriate to publish two reviews of the book on the Rav’s letters so as to better capture the richness of his thought and personality. Ed.

Reviewed by Simcha Krauss

t is common knowledge that the Yet even as the Rav’s influence grew, rabbi of Kovno, with a request that he be Brisker method of Talmud study is as he gained recognition as Orthodoxy’s sent a telegram with a yes or no response, difficult and complex. The terms “two dominant Torah and intellectual figure, without the theoretical pilpul on which I and as studies of the Rav’s teachings mul- the decision was based. The implication dinim,” “gavra and cheftza,” “ma’ase and kinyan,” all freely used by adherents of tiplied, his role as communal leader was was that either Rav Chaim was afraid of this school of thought, show that seem- questioned. Amidst the accolades heaped deciding, or that, as Rav Zevin suggests, on the Rav—such as that “people will be he was always able to see another possibil- ingly simple concepts of Jewish law can 1 3 be examined and explained dialectically, reading him in a thousand years” —some ity of argumentation. Hence, the percep- that is, in multi-faceted and, at times, wondered whether he was really a , tion of Brisk’s inability to decide and its contradictory ways. an authoritative decision maker, for consequent inability to lead. One of the prime expositors of the Community, Covenant and Brisker method in our time was maran The Rav led fearlessly even Commitment offers a radically different Harav Yosef Dov HaLevi Soloveitchik, when he saw dangers or risks understanding of the Rav. The volume z”l. For close to half a century, he taught, in taking particular positions. contains over seventy letters, responsa and inculcated and popularized the Torah of memoranda written by the Rav, dealing Brisk to thousands of students. The Rav, Orthodoxy. The argument went that he with issues of halachah, minhag and pub- however, also broadened and applied this had difficulty making decisions, that he lic policy, as well as chiddushei Torah. method of analysis far beyond the con- was too conflicted, and therefore not real- These writings reflect the gamut of issues fines of “pure” halachah to the whole ly a leader. For example, Hillel Goldberg that touched the lives of American Jews range of aggadic and philosophical texts. accepts the following description of the in the 1950s and ‘60s and ended up on Although comprehensive study of this Rav: the Rav’s desk. In his responses, the Rav phenomenon is beyond the scope of this In its very broad outlines, [Rabbi characteristically cites all sources, analyzes article, the Rav’s creative use of such now Soloveitchik’s] philosophy ... finds great reso- all possibilities and presents a whole array familiar terms as the “two Adams,” “the nance among the modern Orthodox.... But of possible options for resolving the prob- two sides of Elisha ben Abuya” and “the when Rabbi Soloveitchik attempts to apply lems. The mastery of text and theory dis- two covenants” illustrates the point. this philosophy of life to reality, his position played is awesome. But these questions is often indecisive, vacillating, and quite demanded answers, and the Rav provides contrary to expectations. It is the Orthodox the latter with confidence and certitude. Rabbi Krauss was the spiritual leader of Youth who made of Rabbi Soloveitchik a charis- The responses are precise, authoritative, Israel of Hillcrest, in New York, and the imme- matic leader; he disdains this role for him- definitive and often courageous. 2 diate past president of the Religious Zionists of self. The following illustrates the Rav’s America. The author expresses his appreciation In fact, this sort of criticism is not brilliance as a decision maker: In 1950, a to his wife, Esther, and Rabbi Zalman Alpert, new to the history of Brisk. Rav Shlomo supporter of Cornell University left a reference librarian at University’s Yosef Zevin reports that when Rav Chaim bequest for the building of an interfaith Mendel Gottesman Library of Soloveitchik, the Rav’s grandfather, was chapel. Part of the design was for stained Hebraica/Judaica, for their help in preparation confronted by a difficult she’eilah (ques- glass windows depicting human figures, of this article. Rabbi Krauss and his wife tion of Jewish law), he would turn to Rav albeit without any Christological motifs. recently made aliyah and live in Yerusha-layim. Yitzchak Elchanan Spector, the great When some Jewish faculty members 88 JEWISH ACTION Fall 5766/2005 (continued on page 90) (continued from page 88) objected, the university responded that it of the Rabbinical Council of America With full cognizance of the implica- would respect their wishes if a rabbinic turns to the Rav about an invitation the tions of such a halakhic decision, I would authority backed them up. They turned RCA received to cooperate with a group still advise every Orthodox Jew to forego to the Rav, limiting their question to the of non-Orthodox and secular Jewish tefilah be-tzibbur even on Rosh Hashana permissibility of depicting human figures. scholars in the preparation of a new and Yom Kippur rather than enter a syna- 6 The Rav’s response traces the English translation of the Bible. The Rav gogue with mixed pews. halachah and history of the second of the rejects the idea, explaining: This was, of course, strong medi- Ten Commandments, and concludes that I am afraid that the purpose of this cine. But the Rav believed that only such any representation of the human form in undertaking is not to infuse the spirit of a self-confident Orthodoxy would sur- the context of worship, no matter how Torah she-be-al peh into the new English vive. He felt he had to inculcate universal its character, is halachically version but … to satisfy the so-called mod- Orthodox circles with dignity—kevod objectionable. But the Rav does not stop ern “scientific” demands for a more exact HaTorah. When shown a responsum by a there. Acknowledging that he fully under- rendition … in full accord with, or at least non-Orthodox scholar, he reacted stood the implications “in terms of public influenced by, higher Biblical criticism, as follows: relations,” he forcefully attacks the very and I cannot see how we, representatives of ... I have not read the responsum you notion of sharing an interfaith chapel: Torah she-be-al peh, can lend our name to sent me on the question of grafting human 5 The idea of a common house of such an undertaking. bone tissue. I tore it up immediately. I prayer is absolutely irreconcilable with the The Rav realized that his pesak refuse to deal with any halakhic essay, Jewish philosophy of worship ... the worship would be interpreted as a sign of Ortho- regardless of its scholastic merits or fallacies, of God is not a social or collective gesture doxy isolating itself from the rest of the prepared by a representative of a group but is a genuinely individual, most person- Jewish community. In fact, he anticipated whose philosophy is diametrically opposed to al, intimate ... relationship which cannot this critique: Torah and tradition and which does not 4 be shared.… I noticed in your letter that you are a accept the authority of Halakhah as a When this question arose, the bit disturbed about the probability of being Divine and transcendental guide for the Jewish community in America was weak, left out. Let me tell you that this attitude of individual and the community. I am and the Orthodox community weaker shocked at the nonsensical attitude of our still. For American Jews, the priority was The Rav had no hesitation, representatives in tolerating such a pitiful to belong, to homogenize into the larger when the occasion called state of affairs and surrendering the most society, not to stand apart. In some quar- sacred prerogative of the traditional rab- ters, identification with Israel was inter- for it, in appearing harsh, binate, hora’ah [halakhic decision making], to an apostle of a non-halakhic brand of preted as dual loyalty. Jewish day school blunt and inflexible. 7 was widely considered “parochial” and . “ghettoizing.” Sociologists echoed many fear is responsible for many commissions The Rav would not brook ideologi- ordinary Americans in suggesting that all and omissions, compromises and fallacies on cal or theological syncretism. But he was religions share a common message, so our part which have contributed greatly to not only a naysayer; the Rav opposed the there was no need to identify with a par- the prevailing confusion within the Jewish idea that the survival of Orthodoxy ticular creed. In the Jewish community, community and to the loss of our self- depended on isolation and exclusivity. He Orthodox rabbis were up against inter- esteem, our experience of ourselves as inde- had a positive agenda to bring Torah lir- faith services, brotherhood Sabbaths and pendent entities committed to a unique chovah shel ir (to the broad plaza of the Sundays and joint Thanksgiving services; philosophy and way of life. Of course, socia- city) by teaching Torah that was broad, opposition smacked of un-Americanism. bility is a basic virtue and we all hate lone- deep, all-inclusive and all encompassing. In such a cultural environment, it liness and dread the experience of being left The Rav himself was the marbitz took considerable courage for the Rav to alone. Yet at times, there is no alternative Torah par excellence, as attested to by the write a pesak—that would be read by the and we must courageously face the test. sheer volume of his shiurim. He labored president of Cornell University—about Despite the “loneliness” of such a mightily to improve standards of learning the centrality of Jewish holiness, separa- position, the Rav decided, and the Rav led. at his home base, Rabbi Isaac Elchanan tion and uniqueness, and that boldly pro- This steadfastness is apparent on Theological Seminary. In a memorandum claimed that the sanctity of a place of other issues as well, for example, his to Dr. Samuel Belkin, included in this worship requires “respect for privacy and relentless struggle for the sanctity of the volume, the Rav suggests a total overhaul exclusiveness.” Unafraid of such cultural synagogue. On the issue of mechitzah, the of the rabbinic curriculum. His ideas for heresies, the Rav, in his pesak, calls a place Rav stated: “In my opinion, Orthodoxy the courses to be taken by semichah stu- of worship “dedicated to a plurality of must mobilize all its resources ... against dents, as well as his recommendation for cultic modes” a “paradox.” the Christianization ... of the synagogue.” extending the time required for semichah In a similar instance, the president And thus this pesak: studies, resulted in a transformation of 90 JEWISH ACTION Fall 5766/2005 8 11 that program. broadens them greatly. of defeat and reflects a lack of faith in the But his concerns extended far The idea that Orthodox Jews need eternity of Judaism and its ability to domi- nate the new world with its powerful cur- beyond his own institution. When asked “not cower in a corner” and that halachah 14 about how to properly observe and cele- does not isolate the individual from the rents and changing forms. brate the tercentenary of Jewish life in world are staples of the Rav’s teachings. On March 1, 2005, the Orthodox America in 1954, the Rav urged that the And these were the principles that were at community celebrated the completion of the Daf Yomi cycle. The number of Jews occasion he marked, mainly, by Torah the root of his open, unapologetic and brought together that night in large meet- study, and he virtually outlined what proud association with the Religious ing halls, all hooked up by technological should be studied. Zionist movement. marvels, was said to be over 100,000 men The Rav championed inclusivity in In a letter to Reb Shlomo Zalman and women, young and old. Torah study. He felt it “regrettable” to Shragai, a former mayor of Yerushalayim, I was struck that night by a socio- have separate curricula for boys and girls. the Rav noted that his association with logical oddity: Most of the participants, He wrote: Religious Zionism had cost him dearly. had they been asked whether they were The policy of discrimination between Although, he writes, his life would have been easier had he identified with the “card-carrying” Religious Zionists or the sexes as to subject matter and method of “zealots,” he was convinced that our whether they identified with the Modern instruction which is still advocated by cer- worldview and approach are the only ones Orthodox community, would have tain groups within our Orthodox commu- that have the capacity to heal the breach of responded in the negative. Yet many, very nity has contributed greatly to the deterio- our people who are loyal to tradition and to many, of the celebrants are people who ration and downfall of traditional 9 bring back the hearts of children and par- went through the college experience. They 12 Judaism. ents to their Father in Heaven. hold responsible positions in the larger The Rav led fearlessly even when he The Rav spelled out, in brief, this society. They are professionals and busi- saw dangers or risks in taking particular worldview in a letter to Dr. Yosef Burg, ness people in all walks of life. positions. When asked about the estab- former interior minister and leader of the In other words, they are people who lishment of the Albert Einstein College of World Mizrachi Organization. Believing “do not cower in a corner.” They are peo- Medicine at (YU), he that Mizrachi was an all-embracing ideo- ple who are involved in the “multi-faceted answered “from a perspective of upachad logical movement with its own distinctive existence of modern life.” They are, verachav levavech,” (exhibiting initial hesi- philosophy, not just a political party, the whether they sport black hats or not, 10 tation). The experiment might not suc- Rav wrote: whether they acknowledge it or not, the ceed; the school might not live up to We have not removed ourselves from kind of Jews that the Rav predicted could Jewish values. On the other hand, a med- such a world, nor have we withdrawn into emerge “even in America,” if Torah was ical school associated with a yeshivah a secluded corner…. We will not build a given a chance. The Rav labored mightily could radically alter the prevalent percep- Noah’s Ark…. It is our desire to purify and for that chance. tion of Orthodoxy. Ultimately, argued the sanctify the modern world…. It is our The letters in this volume help us Rav, offering advanced academic and pro- belief that Judaism has the means to give understand the Rav’s leading role in the fessional education under the umbrella of meaning and significance, value and refine- Orthodox resurgence. He had no hesita- ment, to the multi-faceted existence of mod- YU would be a victory for Torah because tion, when the occasion called for it, in ern life. We do not fear progress in any area “we must spread Torah in its widest defi- appearing harsh, blunt and inflexible. And of life, since it is our firm conviction that nition” to the total Jewish community. he expected the same from his disciples. we have the ability to cope with and “We have not yet lost the battle, for we Furthermore, a medical school will redeem it. I personally subscribe to this out- 13 have not yet begun to fight,” he told demonstrate to the world that the Torah look with every fiber of my being. Orthodox rabbis when he urged them to Jew need not cower in a corner and gaze He amplified this idea in another stake everything—positions, prestige, with sadness and resignation as life and the letter, to Dr. Moshe Unna, a leading livelihood—in order to save the tradition- world pass him by. The Orthodox Jew must Mizrachi ideologue, in which he al synagogue. demonstrate that he navigates with pride described Mizrachi as … a large move- And the Rav was an optimist, the currents of the modern world and par- ment committed to a specific ideology and believing with all his soul that the struggle ticipates in a life that is racing ever more worldview whose impact is significant both to transform the Jewish community rapidly towards new horizons and great in Israel and in the Diaspora…. I cannot would succeed. This was more than just accomplishments in the domains of science join up to any group or association that has belief and faith. As he said in one of his and technology. We must show the world emblazoned on its banner [the call]: memorable teshuvah shiurim, there is a that not only does the Halakhah not “Separate from the vast world [and go] into difference between “believing” that God restrain the intellectual and emotional dark caves and set yourselves apart from the 15 exists and “knowing” that He exists. The capacities and worldly knowledge of the world and the rest of the Jewish people.” Rav knew, without ifs or buts, without Jews, but, on the contrary, it deepens and This retreat from the battle is the beginning any doubt or hesitation, that Netzach Fall 5766/2005 JEWISH ACTION 91 Yisrael lo yeshaker (The Eternal One of Israel does not lie). This clarity and certi- tude, so strongly reflected in these letters, affected thousands of his pupils. We, generations later, and our descendants even “a thousand years” from now, are the beneficiaries of this confidence and certitude. JA

Notes 1. Arnold Wolf, Shma, 19 September 1975: 295. 2. Between Berlin and Slobodka: Jewish Transition Figures From Eastern Europe (New Jersey, 1985), 197. 3. Ishim Veshitot (Tel Aviv, 1966), 64. 4. 1, pp. 3-10. 5. 12, pp. 110-113. 6. 20, p. 140. In another letter (18, pp. 133-136), the Rav writes, “It would Moshe Meiselman be better not to hear the shofar than to enter a synagogue whose sanctity has (continued from page 89) been profaned.” The few letters in the volume munity that would result from the lack 7. 14, p. 119. regarding the issue of the Synagogue of a compromise. There were two other 8. 11, pp. 93-105. Council are but a tip of the iceberg of individuals whose political interests were 9. 9, p. 83. one of the major issues in Orthodox served by a lack of compromise. These 10. 10, p. 91. This verse from Jewish life of the fifties. Unfortunately, individuals published the earlier text, Isaiah 60:5 was also used by Rav the time has not yet come when the thereby aborting the dialogue about a Avraham Yitzchak HaKohen Kook in his background and details of this contro- compromise text. The Rav never forgave speech at the opening ceremony of The versy can all come to the fore. In 1956, a these two individuals for creating the Hebrew University of in 1924. letter was signed by eleven of the leading unfortunate tensions and acrimony that 11. 10, p. 91. roshei yeshivah of the United States for- resulted from the lack of a compromise 12. 38, p. 206. bidding participation in rabbinic or syn- text. One can debate whether the 13. 37, pp. 203-204. agogue groups together with members of Orthodox community gained anything 14. 36, p. 202. the Conservative and Reform move- from the participation of the RCA in the ments. This would have meant that Synagogue Council. However, the isola- members of the Rabbinical Council of tion of the Rav from the rest of the America (RCA) could no longer be yeshivah world as a result of this contro- members of the Board of Rabbis—a versy was certainly a tragedy that greatly mixed group—and that the Orthodox limited his participation in, and impact To advertise in Union would no longer be able to con- on, the general yeshivah world. the Winter issue of tinue its longstanding affiliation with the This review is certainly not the Synagogue Council of America. The let- venue for a total discussion of the Rav’s ters of the Rav in this volume reflect that position on Zionism. However, whereas the publication of the issur (prohibition) one quarter of the book revolves around Jewish Action of the eleven roshei yeshivah came as a this, one must draw some conclusions surprise to the Rav. In the time immedi- from a few of the letters. The Rav was Contact: In the US ately preceding the publication of the firmly opposed to all changes in the sid- Deborah Lieber issur there was an intense dialogue dur. The letters discuss this both in 212-613-8135 between the Rav and Rav Aharon Kotler response to the Holocaust and to the [email protected] on reaching a compromise text, to which State of Israel. There were two reasons the Rav could be a signatory. Both of for this opposition. First, as he points these gedolim were interested in avoiding out (p. 120) prayer is speaking to God, the divisions within the Orthodox com- and much of the current liturgical 92 JEWISH ACTION Fall 5766/2005