The Special Status of the Intellect

 The Special Status of the Intellect: Adapted from the Torah of Rav Yitzchok Hutner, zt”l

By Eliakim Willner

Eliakim Willner is author of “Nesivos Olam – Nesiv HaTorah: An Appreciation of Torah Study”, a translation with commentary of a work by the Maharal of Prague, published by Artscroll/Mesorah. He is currently working on a continuation of the Nesivos Olam series, “Nesivos Olam – Nesiv HaAvodah: The Philosophy and Practice of Prayer”.

 The Intellect as “Outsider" 

We will discuss and attempt to understand as best we can a principle expounded by the Maharal, who wrote in chapter 9 of Gevuros Hashem that “the intellect is but an outsider, a ger, in this world”. The Maharal introduces this concept in order to explain the wording of a tefilla in the Shmoneh Esrai, wherein Chazal lumped together “the elders of the nation”, “the remnants of the scribes” and “righteous converts” in a single blessing. In that blessing, al hatzadikim, Chazal included in a single supplication righteous converts, gerim, with righteous individuals – the elders and the scribes – and the Maharal explains that the common thread between them is that “the intellect is but a sojourner, a ger, in this world”. In other words, elders and scribes, who are men of intellect, are properly grouped with converts because their signature attribute, their intellect, is an outsider in the context of this world just as a convert is an outsider in the context of the community he has just joined.

The notion of the intellect as an outsider is somewhat opaque, so we will attempt to the best of our ability to clarify it, and we will do so by introducing two halachos that are unique to the intellect.

One Halacha That Defines the Uniqueness of the Intellect

We are obliged, per a Mishna in Avos 2:12, to sanctify our discretionary activities by doing them for the sake of heaven.. For example, when eating one should focus the intent of the action on maintaining his health and strength in order to do Hashem’s will, when exercising one should focus on a similar intent, when engaging in recreation one should focus his intent on obtaining a clear mind in order to better learn Hashem’s Torah, etc. The Mishna derives this obligation from a posuk in Mishlei 3:6, “Know Him in all your ways”. All your activities, the Mishna in Avos exhorts us, should be done for the sake of Heaven.

Thus it follows that if some portion of a person’s discretionary activities are not done for the sake of Heaven, he has neglected his “know Him in all your ways” obligation. He is tainted in that he failed to sanctify an area of his life that was inherently non-sanctified and because of this failure that area of his life remains bereft of sanctity. This, then, is the taint that results from failure to satisfy the “know Him in all your ways” obligation. This is straightforward and obvious.

The point we want to bring out, however, is the uniqueness of the intellect with respect to the obligation to dedicate activity for the sake of Heaven. Whereas utilizing another area of human activity for non-sanctified purposes, without an intent to dedicate that activity for the sake of heaven, incurs only the taint of disregarding “know Him in all your ways”, one who utilizes his intellect for non-sanctified purposes incurs a taint that precedes that of “know Him in all your ways”; a taint and a violation arising from the very character of the intellect itself.

What distinguishes the intellect in this way? The distinction emerges from the halacha that the primary focus of your conversation (“Conversation” is here used in the broader sense of mental activity) should be Torah, and this halacha originates in a posuk from Shma (Devarim 6:7), “and you shall speak of them”, v’dibarta bam. See the commentary of Rashi on that posuk, based on the Sifri.

From this halacha we see that the ultimate objective of the mitzva of Torah study is not merely the study of Torah per se, but rather, the ultimate objective is that no other mental activity aside from involvement in the wisdom of Torah should assume a position of primacy in the intellect. Or, in sharper terms, at a minimum, a subsidiary connection to Torah must be evident in every intellectual activity.

There is, then, a fundamental difference between the intellect and man’s other capabilities when it comes to using them for discretionary activities. With respect to man’s other capabilities, using them in a non-sanctified manner (that is, without an intent to dedicate the activity for the sake of heaven) is but a violation of the general obligation to “know Him in all your ways”. In contrast, using the intellect in a non-sanctified manner constitutes neglect of Torah study and is thus a direct violation of the mitzva of Torah study, because using the intellect in that manner allows for non-Torah mental activities to assume a position of primacy, rather than the required subsidiary-to-Torah position.

Intellect: Not of This World

What underlies this fundamental difference between the intellect and man’s other capabilities? The answer lies in the words of the Maharal, introduced earlier in this discussion: “the intellect is but an outsider in this world”. The relationship between life in this world and life in the next world is that of a physical, senses-based life, versus a spiritual, concepts-based life. Our physical senses cannot grasp an abstract model of a thing. Abstractions are a faculty of the intellect.

Now, since life in the world-to-come and at the end of days is spiritual in nature, those are the epochs in which the intellect will come into full bloom. The power of the intellect in this world is a shadow of what it will be in the future. In that context we may say that our senses and other physical capabilities are native to this world since they are designed to function in a concrete, non-abstract environment.

But the intellect is radically different since its strength lies in its ability to abstract and conceptualize. The intellect is not at home in this material world of physical objects. Its primary power is reserved for the world-to-come and the end of days, where abstraction reigns supreme. Thus its existence here is that of an outsider – “outsider” in the sense that it can only function in an unfettered fashion in its home base. Here, it has one hand tied behind its back. Here, it resides only on a temporary basis.

Indeed, our prophets always characterize the end of days as a time when the status of the intellect, and only the intellect, is enhanced, raised and glorified.

So that is why using an ordinary human faculty for mundane purposes reflects only a failure to sanctify the mundane, while utilizing the intellect for mundane purposes is to wrest it from its natural state of sanctity and impose mundanity upon it.

Another Halacha: Chinuch in Torah Versus Chinuch in Mitzvos

To better understand this principle we herewith present another halacha in which it finds expression.

There are many differences between the mitzva of Torah study and other mitzvos, and one of them has to do with chinuch – readying a youngster for the performance of a mitzva. There is a specific mitzva of chinuch when it comes to mitzvos in general. There is no mitzva of chinuch when it comes to Torah. Let us illustrate what we mean.

When a father introduces his young son to the mitzva of Sukkah, there is in fact no fulfillment of the mitzva of Sukkah, there is only fulfillment of the mitzva of chinuch. See Sukkah 28b. Even though the underage son is going through all the necessary motions to fulfill the mitzva of Sukkah, there is no Sukkah mitzva fulfillment since he is under the age of bar mitzva. However, when a father introduces his young son to the study of Torah there is, in fact, a fulfillment of the mitzva to study Torah.

A lulav in the hands of an underage youngster is an object used to fulfill the mitzva of chinuch (but not the mitzva of lulav). But the words from Devarim 33:4, Torah tziva lanu Moshe, morasha kehillas Yaakov, “The Torah that Moshe commanded us is a legacy for the congregation of Yaakov”, on the lips of a youngster who is capable of speech are actual words of Torah. (The Rambam writes in Mishna Torah, Talmud Torah 1:6 that a father is obligated to teach his son this posuk, and the Shma posuk, as soon as the son begins to speak.)

As we stated, there is no place for chinuch as a separate mitzva when it comes to teaching Torah. Why? The reason is tied to the concept that we have been discussing – the intellect is “pre-programmed” for sanctity.

Chinuch is a matter of dedication – through chinuch the child is being dedicated to the performance of mitzvos. But dedication is necessary only when the object being dedicated is in a neutral state prior to the dedication. The process of dedication then effects a transition from “neutral” to dedicated. But when the initial state is not “neutral”, dedication is superfluous.

Therefore, since mitzvos in general are performed by ordinary human faculties – the ones that are native to this world, which is a place of “sanctity neutrality” – a process of chinuch to dedicate those faculties to the sanctity of mitzvos is necessary. But the study of Torah is the province of the intellect, which is an outsider in this world; intrinsically its proper place is the end of days. Thus, the intellect is not “neutral”. The intellect of a Jew is intrinsically dedicated to and “pre-programmed” for the wisdom of Torah. No further act of dedication is necessary. So it stands to reason that there is chinuch for mitzvos but no chinuch for Torah.

Understand this well; we have only scratched the surface of this topic, which requires a sensitive soul to fully appreciate. We cannot write more; it is impossible to dip the point of the pen into the depths of the inkwell of the heart.

This, at any rate, should provide a broader understanding of the difference between the intellect and the ordinary human faculties, with practical implications in halacha, and gives us a deeper understanding of what the Maharal meant when he wrote that “the intellect is but an outsider, a ger, in this world”.

We have reviewed these concepts many times in the hope that through repetition, the underlying principles will ingrain themselves in our minds, and will enable our own intellects to appreciate their self-worth, so that we treat them with the respect that they, with their exalted status, deserve.

This article is dedicated l’ilui Nishmas my father, Rabbi Yisroel ben Yaakov Willner, who learned and lived these words, on the occasion of his first Yahrtzeit, 18 Shvat.