HaGaon Rav Shlomo Chai David Yitzchak Halioua, zt’l, Rosh Yeshiva of Yeshiva Rabbeinu Chaim Berlin

By Eliakim Willner

It is impossible to encapsulate in writing an individual of the caliber of Rav Shlomo Halioua. However, the emotions rise up and spill over, and it is also impossible to remain silent in the face of the unspeakable tragedy of his untimely petira. I’m sure that many others with qualifications far greater than mine will have words of tribute and homage; chizuk and nechama, but the following are the words that emanate from my own heart. I also draw on the testimony of the maspidim at the levaya, and others with whom I communicated personally, who were profligate in their praise of Rav Shlomo.

This is a tribute that, in my worst nightmares, I never expected to write. It is barely a few hours since the shocking news broke of Rav Shlomo Halioua’s petira, and barely two weeks since the Yeshiva Rabbeinu Chaim Berlin oilam-at-large understood that the Rosh Yeshiva wasn’t well. In fact, he had been ill for some time but few people were aware of his condition. With incredible mind-over-matter kochos – reminiscent of the kochos of his revered shver, Rav Aharon Schechter, zt’l – he soldiered on, delivering shiurim and shmuesen in his usual carefully thought out and meticulously crafted way.

Only very recently did it become evident that his strength might have been waning. At times he sat during davening when he would ordinarily have been standing. Yet, on Rosh HaShana he took the time and made the effort to give personal brachos to the large tzibur that went to be mekabel ponim by him after davening. On Chol Hamoed Sukkos he delivered his usual insightful Maamar and joined in the simcha with a smile on his face.

When we heard that he was hospitalized with an infection toward the end of Chol Hamoed, we weren’t shocked but neither were we alarmed. After all, the Rosh Yeshiva was a relatively young man and infections were treatable.

Only in the last week did the seriousness of the situation hit us. The change in atmosphere in the Yeshiva was palpable. Tehillim were recited with great fervor during the last days of yom tov, at every opportunity in the Yeshiva – before leining, after davening, before hakafos – and a large chabura forewent the pre-hakafos kiddush and said Tehillim again, b’tzibur.

His brother-in-law, Rav Sendrovitz, tore the heavens as he led the tzibur in Tehillim after Shachris on Sunday morning. But we were not zoche to reverse the gezaira and the bitter news reached us shortly after 2:00pm Sunday afternoon, chof-hai Tishrei.

His Ascension to Rosh Yeshiva

As Rosh Yeshiva, Rav Shlomo had huge shoes to fill; much of the oilam remembered Rav Hutner zt’l and of course everyone had vivid and immediate memories of Rav Aharon Schechter, zt’l. Rav Aharon hand-picked Rav Shlomo, his son-in-law, as his successor and it is safe to say that Rav Aharon fully expected Rav Shlomo to strike a balance between maintaining the traditions and minhagim of Yeshiva Chaim Berlin, while striking out on his own path, to meet the changing needs of the times.

This was no mean feat, but Rav Shlomo was up to the task. The “old-timers” continued to feel at home in the Yeshiva but Rav Shlomo “tweaked” as necessary to accommodate the dispositions of today’s bochrim. For example, Rav Shlomo instituted “in Shabbosos” for the younger Bais Medrash bochrim to encourage camaraderie and to build their kesher to the Yeshiva. He gave the younger bochrim a greater role in organizing and managing the Leil Shabbos and weekday sidrei ha’tefillos. He was mechazek sedorim on erev Shabbos and on Shabbos kodesh itself.

Rebbe-talmid relationships have always been very strong in the Yeshiva, but Rav Shlomo strengthened them even further by traveling to Eretz Yisroel to meet with the Yeshiva Rabbeinu Chaim Berlin bochrim learning there. He strove to relate to each bochur on an individual level, in the Yeshiva Rabbeinu Chaim Berlin tradition established and maintained by Rav Hutner and Rav Schechter.

The Early Years

Rav Shlomo was the son of Rav Avrohom Halioua, zt’l, a choshuver talmid chochom who became a Rav in Flatbush after emigrating from Morocco, and of Masoda bas Jamilla (who passed away only hours after Rav Shlomo’s petira and who whose aron joined that of Rav Shlomo outside the Yeshiva so that the massive oilam gathered for Rav Shlomo’s levaya could be melave her, as well).

Rav Shlomo Halioua’s abilities became known at a young age. Rav Shlomo Mandel, Rosh Yeshiva of the Yeshiva of Brooklyn, told me that he saw Rav Shlomo Halioua’s potential when he was yet a young student at that yeshiva. He later learned by Rav Paler zt’l, by Rav Faivel Cohen zt’l and in the Brooklyn Yeshivas Mir, before coming to Yeshiva Rabbeinu Chaim Berlin, where he became very close to the Rosh Yeshiva, Rav Aharon Schechter, soon becoming his son-in-law. He developed and maintained a close kesher with Rav Yaakov Drillman, Rosh Yeshiva of the Novardok Yeshiva.

Rav Shlomo’s gadlus in all miktzo‘os of Torah was legendary. He was a masmid from his early years; a boki in, among other things, shas, rishonim, acharonim; Maharal and Ramchal and other machshova seforim, and in inyonei tefilla. He was also a tremendous baal chesed – but always, in all areas, with the comportment of a true hatznaya leches.

His memory was incredible; it was said of him that talmidei chachomim could engage with him on any topic and he had that topic on his fingertips.

His Relationship with Rav Aharon Schechter

Rav Aharon relied on Rav Shlomo and often consulted with him on both Yeshiva and klal matters, especially in Rav Aharon’s later years. He trusted Rav Shlomo to represent him in meetings of senior Roshei Yeshiva, when Rav Aharon himself was unable to attend. Rav Aharon knew that although Rav Shlomo was an independent thinker, his and Rav Shlomo’s minds ran along similar paths, so to speak, and ultimately focused on achieving the same objectives.

A major factor in Rav Shlomo’s decision making process, even after Rav Aharon’s petira, was “How would Rav Aharon have responded to this question?” or “How would Rav Aharon have handled that situation?”

Middos and Hanhagos

Rav Shlomo was soft-spoken but firm on matters of principle and did not hesitate to hold his ground in those areas. He was adamant that once a proper course was identified, it would be adhered to.

My personal encounters with Rav Shlomo were limited, but despite the fact that he was eons above me in every respect, he related to me, as he did to most people he interacted with, as an equal. He had the rare quality of genuine humility; he never “spoke down” to anyone because he didn’t think of himself as “up”. He never lost sight of the individual and was sensitive to every person’s feelings, even as he focused on larger issues of the Yeshiva and the tzibur.

I once consulted him about an idea I had for a certain project. A conversation with him was always a pleasant affair; he was easy-going, had a sense of humor, and, aside from the matter I approached him about, was genuinely interested in what was going on in my life.

Although he immediately grasped all the implications of the idea, both positive and negative, he told me that he wanted to think about it and asked that I return a few days later for a response. When I did return he advised an approach that accentuated the positive implications of my project while downplaying the negative ones. Despite the sharpness of his intellect, he followed the dictum of chazal to not be hasty in deciding questions with halachic implications.

The Levaya

The hespedim were heartfelt and filled with much specific toichen about Rav Shlomo, and they held the oilam in their grip throughout. Sometimes the bochrim of today are described as cold or unfeeling but the wails and the wrenching sobs that rose, specifically from his many talmidim, during the hespedim, made it clear that this wasn’t so, at least with respect to the feelings of his talmidim for Rav Shlomo.

The maspidim were, in order of appearance, Rav Chaim Kitevits, R”M in the Yeshiva, Rav Yosef Halioua, Rosh Kollel Gur Aryeh, Rav Tzvi Fink, a son-in-law, the Lakewood Rosh Yeshiva, Rav Malkiel Kotler (all shlita), Reb Boruch Halioua; sons-in-law Reb Yitzchok Aharon Shonek and Reb Yehuda Herzka, Reb Avrohom Halioua, Reb Yaakov Halioua, Reb Refoel Halioua, Chaim Tzi Halioua, Eliyahu Halioua; Rav Eliyahu Yormark, Rav Yitzchok Meir Sendrovitz and Rav Avigdor Kitevits (all shlita).

Much of what was said has already been covered in this tribute and it would take reams of paper to even summarize the hespedim, worthwhile as they were, in full. I will present various additional points that the maspidim brought to the fore, largely without specific attribution, since many of the points were raised by multiple maspidim.

Rav Chaim Kitevits noted that Rav Shlomo could be referred to as being comparable to a malach Hashem, in his single-minded concern for his talmidim and for the hatzlocho of the Yeshiva.

The family and the Yeshiva were all made yesomim by the petira of Rav Shlomo, in that we are bereft of the Torah that he might have transmitted, but which will no longer be available to us.

Rav Shlomo, inherently a private person, had a mokom mutzneh, a secluded portion of his intellect that was continually active in learning – analyzing, asking, answering and fine-tuning his understanding of sugyos. It wasn’t unusual for him to give the appearance of “returning to earth” from his own private world when someone approached him with a question.

His approach to learning defies typical darchei limud; it was described as “top-down”, ending in new havanos, and it became clear, after-the-fact, that these havanos emanated from the specific wording of the sugya under study.

Rav Shlomo was compared to a maayan hamisgaber that was always rooted in oilam haba and which will remain connected to his talmidim even as he himself now inhabits oilam haba.

Rav Shlomo was noteworthy for his yishuv hadaas, his bitachon and his menuchas hanefesh – his serenity, all of which lead to his perpetually exuding simcha.

As mentioned, few knew that the Rosh Yeshiva was ill for over a year prior to his petira. But the illness did result in his occasional absences from the Yeshiva for treatments and the like, so minyanim in the Yeshiva and shiurim were missed, and this was bound to raise eyebrows. Someone suggested that perhaps he should make his illness known, to avoid exciting comment by his absences. He responded that he feared that people would be reluctant to approach him with their personal or  klal issues if they knew he was ill, and he would rather have people think poorly of him than avoid availing themselves of his advice. Such was his self-sacrifice for the sake of the tzibur.

The point was made several times of his extreme zehirus in shmiras ainayim and in his dibbur. He was meticulous to never speak or listen to anything remotely approaching loshon horah. Rav Shlomo did not drive and, as related by Rav Avigdor Kitevits, he confided to a chaver that it was impossible to drive carefully without looking in all directions, and if he did that, who could tell what he might see? So he opted to be a passenger, who could avoid looking out of the car windows.

The Yeshiva had a difficult year, with the passing, first of the Rosh Yeshiva, Rav Aharon Schechter, zt’l, then with the passing of the Mashgiach, Rav Mordechai Schechter, zt’l, and now with the passing of Rav Shlomo, zt’l. As Rav Yormark said, “the wound that was beginning to close was ripped open”, and we, as a tzibur need to be mechazek ourselves. The Yeshiva had tremendous hatzlocho the past few zemanim and we are challenged to continue to rise to even greater heights.

As Rav Sendrovitz put it, on Simchas Torah we returned the sifrei Torah to the aron kodesh, and just two days later, Rav Shlomo was returned to his “aron kodesh” in shomayim.

But, Rav Chaim Kitevits emphasized, the Yeshiva will rise to even greater heights and the talmidim will continue to grow in Torah, avodah and yiras shomayim!

His Legacy

I had been looking forward very much to interacting with Rav Shlomo more over time. Alas, none of us will have that opportunity any longer. He was poised to make many and more significant contributions to the Yeshiva Chaim Berlin legacy as his leadership of the Yeshiva continued. Alas, that is also not to be. But even during his short tenure as Rosh Yeshiva he has left a substantial mark and that mark will endure, and be a significant foundation for his successor to build on, iyH, as the Yeshiva continues to thrive and flourish – as it is sure to. That will be Rav Shlomo’s everlasting legacy. Yehi zichro baruch.

A Deeper Appreciation of a Well-Known Ramban on Mitzvos that are Zecher L’Yitzias Mitzraim Adapted from the Torah of Rav Yitzchok Hutner, zt”l (Pachad Yitzchok, Chanukah, Reshima)

A Deeper Appreciation of a Well-Known Ramban on Mitzvos that are Zecher L’Yitzias Mitzraim Adapted from the Torah of Rav Yitzchok Hutner, zt”l (Pachad Yitzchok, Chanukah, Reshima)

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. A continuation of the Nesivos Olam series, “Nesivos Olam – Nesiv HaAvodah: The Philosophy and Practice of Prayer”, and an adaptation of a collection of Pachad Yitzchok Maamorim for an English-speaking audience, are currently awaiting publication.

Before we present Rav Hutner’s insightful appreciation of the words of the Ramban we will quote this seminal Ramban directly, in free translation. The Ramban appears at the end of parshas Bo (Shmos 13:16).

The Ramban

“I now present a principle that will explain numerous mitzvos.

“From the time that idol worship began spreading throughout the world, in the days of Enosh, people began to develop corrupted faith ideas. Some denied the existence of a Creator and maintained that the world always existed. Some denied Hashem’s omniscience saying, ‘How does Hashem know, and is there knowledge in the Most High?’ (Tehillim 73:11). Others acknowledge His omniscience but deny his active direction of world affairs, claiming that man and beast are equal in that Hashem does not watch over them, does not reward or punish them and does not care what happens in the world.

“When Hashem chooses a group or an individual and performs miracles that depart from the natural order on their behalf these false ideas are discredited for all to see. Open miracles demonstrate that there is a G-d in the world who created it from nothing, who knows what transpires in it, who watches over His creations and who is omnipotent. Moreover, when the miracle is predicted in advance by a prophet it further demonstrates that there is truthful prophecy and that Hashem communicates with man and reveals his secrets to His servants, the prophets. This in turn demonstrates the veracity of the Torah. …

“Thus, open miracles and signs are clear proofs to the principles of our faith in Hashem and to the entirety of the Torah.

“And since Hashem will not perform signs and miracles in every generation, and in the presence of every evil person and scoffer, He has commanded us to continually make commemorations and remembrances to these miracles that we witnessed with our own eyes and to pass a record of these events to our children, and they to their children, and so on until the final generation. And Hashem was very stringent on this matter, as we see from the fact that excision was decreed upon those who consume chometz or neglect the korban Pesach…

“There are many other mitzvos that are commemorations of the Egyptian exodus and the purpose of all of them is that there be, in all generations, support for the principles of our faith through these never-to-be-forgotten miracles, and so that there shall be no opening for scoffers to deny these principles of faith.

“Thus, a person who purchases a mezuzah for pennies,  and affixes it to his doorpost, and has in mind its purpose, implicitly acknowledges that Hashem created the world, is aware of what transpires in it, actively supervises it, communicates to prophets; and he also implicitly acknowledges his belief in all the fundamentals of the Torah – and, moreover, he demonstrates at the same time that Hashem is benevolent in the extreme to those who fulfill his will, as can be seen from the fact that He delivered us from slavery to freedom and to great honor, in the merit of our forefathers, who chose to serve Him…

And in acknowledging open and public miracles, a person is at the same time acknowledging hidden miracles, which are the foundation of the entire Torah, for a person has no claim to any part of the Torah of Moshe if he does not believe that all our affairs and all our events, whether transpiring to groups or to individuals, are themselves miracles, not results of nature or predetermination.

“Rather, if a person fulfills the mitzvos his reward will be success, and if he violates them his penalty will be excision, all in accordance with Hashem’s will…”

The Pachad Yitzchok’s Understanding of The Ramban

What does it mean to say, in such strong terms, that mundane events are actually miracles? This is the focus of the Pachad Yitzchok’s discussion, as follows.

In his well-known commentary at the end of Parshas Bo (Shmos 13:16), the Ramban writes that open miracles enable us to appreciate that what appears to be the “natural order” is actually just as miraculous, albeit in a non-obvious way. Open miracles demonstrate that Hashem is continually aware of what transpires in the universe and maintains full control over all events, large and small. However, for reasons the Ramban explains, Hashem prefers to keep his “choreography” obscure, except in exceptional circumstances, hiding His involvement in what appears to be laws of nature. He concludes with the statement that anyone who does not believe that all apparently natural events are in reality “stealth miracles” has utterly rejected the Torah of Moshe.

Let us examine the inner workings of the relationship between open miracles and the stealth miracles that are commonly referred to as natural law, as defined by the Ramban.

By definition, the laws of nature take the form of limits. In the physical world infinity is a concept, not a reality. Things and events have start and end points and quantifiable measurements. Limits stand in opposition to the Ohr Haganuz, the primordial light that marked the onset of the creation process; the light about which it is said that (Chagigah 12a), “with it, man could see from one end of the universe to the other”. The light of the first day of creation is a supernatural, spiritual light that exists independently of any heavenly bodies (which had net yet been created). Hashem hid it away for a future time so that it would not be used by the sinful generations that would soon ensue. Since this light is infinite, the concept of “limit” does not apply to it and it is thus not subject to natural law, which is, as we said, bound by limits.

The Ohr Haganuz was hidden away for the righteous, in the world-to-come. (See Rashi on Beraishis 1:4, citing Beraishis Rabbah 3:6) It is important, though, for seekers of the deeper layers of meaning that underlie the words of chazal to clearly understand that when chazal say about a thing that it was “hidden away” the intent is not to convey that for all practical purposes it ceases to exist in the here-and-now.

It is a fallacy, for example, to think that when chazal teach us (See Shekalim 6:1; Yoma 53b) that the Aron, the ark of the covenant, was hidden away, they mean to imply that the world is the same with the Aron hidden as it would be if the Aron did not exist at all. If the Aron exists, it is certain that there are here-and-now implications to its existence, albeit that it is hidden. Rather, “hidden” means that the effects of the Aron’s existence prior to its being hidden are different from the effects after it was hidden. Prior to its being hidden, the effects of the Aron’s existence were overt and perceptible. After it was hidden its effects are also hidden; they are veiled and obscured. (See Pachad Yitzchok, Shavuous, Maamar 26:14)

The same principle applies with respect to the Ohr Haganuz. Ordinarily it also makes its presence felt in the here-and-now, in a veiled and obscured manner. This is what we call “nature” – finite, and following predictable rules which limit physical behavior – for example, the law of gravity limits the direction in which an object can move; the law of momentum limits how far an object will travel when force is applied to it, and so on. It is in fact a reigned-in version of the Ohr Haganuz that provides the energy for the material world to function, albeit in the limited manner that it does. However, what we call a “miracle” and what we call “nature” are actually the same Ohr Haganuz working in two different ways. A well-placed, miniscule “puncture” in the fabric of the veil that, as a rule, hides the Ohr Haganuz, manifests itself as a suspension of the normally restrained behavior in the area where the puncture was made. For example, in the case of kriyas yam suf, water rose instead of seeking its level – its behavior when the Ohr Haganuz is veiled, as it usually is. We refer to this suspension of the veiling of the Ohr Haganuz as a “miracle”. When, however, the veil remains tightly sealed in all directions, then the Ohr Haganuz only functions in muted form, its full powers hidden, and we refer to this state of affairs as “nature”.

This is what the Ramban means when he writes that, in reality, nature is actually miracles in hidden form. He is saying that the very same Ohr Haganuz that powers miracles, actually powers the day-to-day events of nature. When the hiddenness is lessened that light produces miracles. When the hiddenness remains intact that light produces nature.

The Maamar is adding an important additional dimension to our understanding of the Ramban. Superficially the Ramban can be understood as merely saying that Hashem’s involvement in world (and individual) affairs is as real and intense when it is non-obvious (through natural law) as when it is blatant (through miracles). This is certainly true. However the Maamar additionally points out that it is actually the same force – the Ohr Haganuz – that powers both natural law and miracles, although functioning in different ways. Not only do natural law and miracles have the same divine Author, they are both implemented using a common medium – the Ohr Haganuz.

 

 

Rav Mordechai Zelig Schechter, Z’tl

 Rav Mordechai Zelig Schechter, Z’tl

By Eliakim Willner

The Chaim Berlin community is shell-shocked, having suffered the loss of our revered Rosh Yeshiva, Rav Aharon Moshe Schechter, z’tl, and his son, the Mashgiach, Rav Mordechai Zelig, z’tl, in a matter of weeks.

My relationship with the Rosh Yeshiva – a talmid/Rebbe relationship, was primarily one of yirah. My relationship with Rav Mordechai – a peer, a valued member of our close-knit chaburah, with whom I spent years in Bais Medrash and Kollel – was that of a yedid.

Today’s hespedim dealt with Rav Mordechai’s shlaimus – his insistence on getting to the bottom of an issue, a seeker of emes, his obliviousness to gashmius, his total absorption in the physical and spiritual well-being of the talmidim of the Yeshiva – and his devotion to his father’s and to Rav Hutner ztl’s Torah.

The hespedim brought me back in time, to when Rav Mordechai was one of the chevra, forty or fifty years ago. I felt a sense of dissonance; of disconnect. None of us suspected the greatness that Mutty (as he was known to us then) was destined for. He never gave himself airs, as son of the Rosh Yeshiva, or acted “holier” than the rest of us.

As I said, we were (and to a large extent, still are) a close-knit chaburah. We had deep and passionate late-night discussions (especially in Camp Morris) about the kinds of things bochrim that age talk about – subjects ranging from hashkofo, the latest Yeshiva hock, politics, etc. Mutty participated with gusto, along with the rest of us. His views were sometimes off the beaten track but they were always well-thought out; never ad hoc.

We might not have recognized the Mutty of those years as the Mashgiach, Rav Mordechai, that he would become (indeed, Mutty himself might not have recognized himself as the Mashgiach he became). Thus the dissonance. And yet, in retrospect, had we looked more closely, we would have seen the seeds that sprouted and grew into the greatness that the hespedim described.

The first such seed was his passion for cutting through nonsense and seeking truth. Even as a bochur, he was never content with the notion of “conventional wisdom” – if the hamon thinks it, it must be true. If any of us took that position with him, Mutty would confront him with pointed questions that exposed the weak foundations of that person’s argument.

As Rav Mordechai matured, that seed was directed more and more toward his limud Torah. I remember listening with him to tapes of the shiurim of his father. He would not rest until he, personally, got to the bottom of every difficulty. He would never content himself with the thought that “the Rosh Yeshiva said it so it must be true”. Yes, he KNEW that it must be true. But he HAD to understand WHY it was true.

The seeds were there. The disconnect was in us. We didn’t see it then but we see it now.

Rav Mordechai (in one of the few ways he wasn’t like his father) appreciated cool, rather than heat. Yet, in the early years of his marriage – and later as well –  despite his access to Camp Morris, he preferred staying in the city. I asked him why, since it was cooler and more comfortable in the country, and he responded that he didn’t see the need for the additional expense. “But what about your comfort?” I asked him. “Don’t you prefer cool?” He responded, “Eli, if I ran my air conditioner day and night all summer, it would cost a fraction of what it would cost to take a bungalow in the country!”

That was the frugality seed that sprouted into his almost-complete eschewal of indulgence in gashmius in his later life. The seed was there. The disconnect was in us.

Mutty got along with everyone, notwithstanding their background. He was non-judgmental, but without giving the slightest ground when it came to matters of principle. And yet, he was capable of kanaus l’shaim shomayim when the situation called for it. But unlike others who gloried in their kanaus, his was well-thought-out, carefully disciplined, and not tainted by personal enmity. 

There was a fellow in the Bais Medrash who, for whatever reason, made certain slight noises during lail Shabbos Maariv, and it bothered some of the other mispallelim in his vicinity, I spoke to Rav Mordechai about it and he said, calmly, that there was no stopping the fellow without taking drastic action. And he asked me, “Do you really think, in the grand scheme of things, that this behavior merits drastic action?” It hit me that perhaps I was over-blowing the issue. His words made me look at it in an entirely different light. And I conceded that he was right.

A “kippa sruga” cousin of mine once visited from Israel and I took him to the Yeshiva to daven. It was his closest experience to date with the Chareidi world. As was my custom, I went to say good Shabbos to Rav Mordechai after davening and introduced him to my cousin. After the usual “Nice to have you here, where are you from?”, he engaged him in conversation about the Yeshiva where he learned, where he served in the army, what he thought of the political situation…” They spoke in easy conversation for about 20 minutes. It was very clear that Rav Mordechai knew what he was talking about. Afterwards my cousin told me, “I didn’t know Chareidi Rabbis were like that”. Indeed, not all of them are.

Before his illness the Mashgiach always made a very early-morning appearance in the Bais Medrash and sat and learned by his shtender with single-minded devotion. After he became ill, and the learning was more difficult, he nonetheless made his appearance in the Yeshiva at his usual hour.  He would wander into the Bais Medrash and out, back in again, and out.

In his hesped, Rav Yitzchok Meir Sendrovitz compared this behavior to that of a yid during yimei hadin, recoiling from Hashem in awe and fear, and running. Running where? Why, back to Hashem, of course, since that was his only possible source of salvation. Rav Mordechai knew, even when his mind wasn’t at its best, that his place was the Bais Medrash. This was home. This was the place that nurtured him and in which, in turn, he himself nurtured the Yeshiva’s many talmidim. Even when his usual learning was no longer possible, for him, there was no other place to run.

In those dark days, the Mashgiach kept a cot in his office so he could lay down and rest when he felt weak. At times, in the early morning, he would ask me to get him a coffee, or something to eat, and then ask me to stay with him as he rested, appealing to me to daven for him. I promised him that I would. And I did. We all did.

It is likely that Rav Mordechai would not have liked this article. To him, it was never about him. But in justice to him, after his petira, and for the sake of kovod hatorah, I think these things must be said. Rav Mordechai, I beg your mechila but I believe I am doing the right thing.

The Yeshiva has lost another part of its heart. Our chaburah has lost a valuable member. I have lost a cherished friend. Yehi zichro boruch.

Personal Reminisces of Fifty Years Under the Tutelage of My Rebbi, My Rosh Yeshiva – HaRav Aharon Moshe Schechter z’tl

Personal Reminisces of Fifty Years Under the Tutelage of My Rebbi, My Rosh Yeshiva – HaRav Aharon Moshe Schechter z’tl

This is an expanded version of an article that appeared on page 78 of the September 1^st, 2023 edition of the  Yated Neeman.

By Eliakim Willner

Some years ago I was editor of the Yeshivas Rabbeinu Chaim Berlin Alumni Newsletter. In the issue that followed Rav Aharon’s becoming the Rosh Yeshiva I naively inserted a short paragraph mentioning the fact, along with a brocha for hatzlocho. That issue was placed at every setting at the Chaim Berlin dinner that year. At some point, prior to the arrival of the guests, the Rosh Yeshiva happened to see the issue, and the paragraph, and requested that the copies be collected and not distributed.

I was naturally perturbed, so shortly thereafter I told the Rosh Yeshiva that I wished to apologize. He said, “What for?” I responded, “To be honest, I’m not sure what for, but I heard what happened at the dinner and I want to understand what I did wrong.” With his characteristic smile, the Rosh Yeshiva explained that “Rosh Yeshiva” was not a “job” like, l’havdil, “CEO” and in no way should be treated as such. The Rosh Yeshiva understood and accepted that I meant well, but felt that it was worth confiscating all copies of that issue to avoid any hint of pechisus in the exalted role of a Rosh Yeshiva.

I begin with this story because it brings to the fore the Rosh Yeshiva’s constant emphasis on gadlus haTorah and chashivus haTorah. It also brings to the fore his ability to make almost every interaction with his talmidim into teaching moments.

The Rosh Yeshiva was exacting in his choice of words and I tremble with the thought that I may, in this article, inadvertently not phrase things in a manner befitting the kovod due him. I ask for mechila in advance, but perhaps some leeway can be permitted for devarim hayotzim min halev, written in the heat of emotion, just a day after his petira.

***

For many years the Rosh Yeshiva gave motzai Shabbos chazoros of Maamorim from his own Rebbi, Rav Hutner zt’l’s Torah – from Sefer Pachad Yitzchok. Time stood still during those chazoros; the Rosh Yeshiva was living the words of the Maamar, his face alight, his words carefully chosen. Deep concepts were repeated, often with a different choice of words, to bring out nuances that might not have been apparent before.

On Friday nights the Rosh Yeshiva often hosted bochrim for the Shabbos seudah, and the seudah was followed by an extemporaneous shiur on the Ramban of the parshas hashavuah. Although I ate at home, I tried, as often as possible, to walk to the Rosh Yeshiva’s house afterwards for the Ramban “shiur”. The lessons on how to approach a Ramban were eye-opening and have remained with me to this day.

The Rosh Yeshiva wanted us to remember that chol hamoed was yom tov. During the years that Rav Hutner gave chol hamoed Maamorim in the Yeshiva, Rav Aharon gave chazoros the next morning to a small chaburah. Rav Aharon reviewed each point of the Maamar, explaining it in detail and responding to our questions. The Maamorim, and the chazoros, opened up new vistas in machshova for those of us fortunate enough to attend them. They also took several hours, insuring that we would, in fact, be observing at least part of chol hamoed as yom tov!

***

The Rosh Yeshiva was once searching for a word to describe the actions of a predatory animal against its victim. Members of the chabura threw out some suggestions – perhaps “attack” or “injure” would do? The Rosh Yeshiva was not satisfied. His point could not be effectively made without the exact word he had in mind (the word, which he remembered with great joy, was “maul”).

I was privileged to serve as gabbai for Shabbos kabolas Shabbos and Maariv for some years. I needed to discuss something in that regard with the Rosh Yeshiva and I thoughtlessly started with “last Friday night…”. The Rosh Yeshiva quickly interrupted with a mock scowl: “Friday night??? NO, LEIL SHABBOS!” The Rosh Yeshiva was makpid not only with his own choice of words, but also with those of his talmidim.

***

The Rosh Yeshiva was also very makpid to daven slowly and carefully and aloud, looking at every word in his siddur.  He used a small card to be sure he was looking at the right place and, in the days when the Rosh Yeshiva was unfortunately not so audible, the shluchai tzibur, who would naturally not move ahead until the Rosh Yeshiva was ready to, learned to know his place by watching his card and waiting for it to stop moving.

The Rosh Yeshiva listened to every word of the sholiach tzibur and immediately picked up on any deviation from halacha or from the minhagim of the Yeshiva, as they were established by his own Rebbi, Rav Hutner. In fact he was strongly makpid to preserve those minhagim even when they were not halachically m’akev. If for example, the shatz dropped his voice by go’al yisroel, or said “morid haGOshem” instead of “morid haGEshem” he would hear about it from the Rosh Yeshiva. If the shatz dawdled by lecha dodi and risked not reaching mizmor shir l’yom hashabos before shkia, the Rosh Yeshiva would rush him along, nigun or no nigun!

The Rosh Yeshiva was makpid that the sholichei tzibur should take their tefillos, and particularly chazoras hashatz, at a sedate pace, often signaling to the shatz to slow down. In fact he had the following sign posted prominently on the amud, as a reminder.

The Rosh Yeshiva was strongly opposed to the use of cellphones within the confines of the Yeshiva and no one dared to take or make phone calls in the building lest the Rosh Yeshiva see them. One day I had to make an important call and walked out of the Yeshiva to do so. Since it was raining, I made my call on the bottom step of the covered portico leading out of the Yeshiva. At that moment the Rosh Yeshiva was leaving the building and sternly told me, “Eliakim! Remember, no cell phone usage in the Yeshiva building!” I stammered that I was out of the building and he pointed up to the roof overhead and said “as long as you are sheltered under a roof of the Yeshiva, even outdoors, you are in the mechitzos of the building!” Lesson learned!

***

I was in the  Rosh Yeshiva’s blatt shiur for several years. They were deep and comprehensive – so much so that I did not want to trust to memory or even notes, to engrave them on my mind. With the Rosh Yeshiva’s permission I recorded them and went over them later, often with a chavrusa, pausing frequently to review and write down questions, which we then took to the Rosh Yeshiva for clarification. (One of my chavrusas in this endeavor was Rav Mordechai Schechter, the Rosh Yeshiva’s son and the Yeshiva’s mashgiach ruchni – may he have a refuah shlaimo!) This practice formed the basis for the derech halimud that I use, in my own small way, to this day.

One zman my chavrusa, Yaakov Jacobson a’h and I, learned with the Rosh Yeshiva for afternoon seder. I asked the Rosh Yeshiva for reshus to leave early one day, explaining that I had to donate blood. The Rosh Yeshiva asked, with concern, if everyone was OK, and I explained everyone was fine, but my family’s medical insurance required that every year one family member donate a pint of blood in order to provide transfusions coverage for the entire family, and this year it was my turn.

The Rosh Yeshiva told me that it was questionable if donating blood in that circumstance was permitted, and that I should ask a shailo. I stammered that I had no idea who to ask, and how to ask, and that in any case my appointment was imminent... He excused himself and went to his office, returning ten or fifteen minutes later to tell me that he asked on my behalf and that in fact it was permissible. I was stunned at the Rosh Yeshiva’s level of achrayus for his talmidim – taking time out of his own afternoon seder to ask a shailo on behalf of a clueless bochur who unwittingly got himself into a predicament.

***

When I left kollel I went to the Rosh Yeshiva for hadracha and advice. Among other things he told me that it was important that I should have a seder in Mishnayos. I must have looked a bit taken aback because I was thinking, “Does the Rosh Yeshiva suspect that I’m finished learning Gemara now that I’m leaving full-time learning?” The Rosh Yeshiva smiled and responded to my unspoken unease. “I don’t mean that you should chav vesholom stop learning Gemara”, he said – “I know that you will keep good bekius sedorim. But I want you to have yedios from all of shas, and the best way to do that is to have a consistent seder in Mishnayos”.

I took his advice and several years later was making a Mishnayos siyum, with a seudah for family in my home. I was shocked when there was a ring at the bell and the Rosh Yeshiva himself was at the door. He had heard about the siyum from one of my sons and wanted to be mishtatef. Such was the Rosh Yeshiva’s mesiras nefesh for his talmidim, even after they left the Yeshiva.

During that post-kollel tekufah I wanted to discuss an urgent personal matter with the Rosh Yeshiva. I was generally reluctant to impose on the Rosh Yeshiva’s time but felt at that juncture that it was justified. The Rosh Yeshiva said, “Yes, we can talk later today. Come to my office at home at 2 o'clock. I stammered that I was working at 2 o'clock and could we perhaps make it after hours? The Rosh Yeshiva gave me a surprised look: “I know you work during the day. I meant 2:00 o’clock AM.”

When I arrived at that hour the place looked like Grand Central – people were coming and going, the phone was ringing, the fax machine was buzzing… Nonetheless, I had the Rosh Yeshiva’s full attention as I laid out my issue, and received the advice that I had been seeking, leaving in wonderment at the Rosh Yeshiva’s incredible stamina.

Another example of the Rosh Yeshiva’s legendary mesiras nefesh for his talmidim: Many years ago, one of our chabura was getting married the night after the Rosh Yeshiva was released from the hospital after serious surgery. Yet, the Rosh Yeshiva insisted on attending the chasunah. I observed him walking in, bent over and supported on each side. When the dancing started he asked to be taken in to the main hall to dance with the chosson. I and others around him looked at him incredulously. He could barely walk on his own, how could he possibly dance with the chosson? Yet, he shook off his gabbaim walked into the circle, and danced in his inimitable fashion, smiling, with his arms in the air, an active vision of kedusha, as if he were in perfect health. I have never seen a more potent example of “mind over matter”. It was known that the Rosh Yeshiva had other-worldly self-discipline. Here was living proof. The Rosh Yeshiva’s conviction was that dancing with the chosson was the right thing a Rebbi should do for his talmid, and he was able to push the physical barriers aside in order to do so.

***

There were times after that surgery that the Rosh Yeshiva felt that he would not be able to function properly unless he took some time to rest, and he kept a cot in his office for that purpose. One Sunday afternoon I was discussing a matter with the Rosh Yeshiva in his office, and when we finished, he said, “Eliakim, I need to lay down to rest for a while. Please do me a favor and sit outside my office and don’t let anyone disturb me”. I was happy to oblige so I picked up a sefer and took my post. (It became immediately clear that my presence was necessary, since there was a constant flow of would-be visitors.)

More than an hour later the Rosh Yeshiva emerged from his office with profuse apologies: “Eliakim I didn’t intend for you to sit out here for so long, I only wanted to rest for a few minutes!” I responded that I didn’t have anything time-sensitive to take care of, in any event I was learning, and besides “if the Rosh Yeshiva rested for so long then clearly his body needed the rest and I wasn’t going to be the one to disturb it”. What struck me, though, was that the Rosh Yeshiva’s primary concern was my supposed waste of time, and not his own waste of time.

***

The Rosh Yeshiva’s caring extended to every yid, talmid or not. Shortly before the wedding of one of my son’s, my mother-in-law was struck by a car, badly injured and rendered comatose. My father-in-law was very broken but he attended my  son’s wedding. During the dancing, however, he could not restrain his grief, and went into a quiet corner to cry. Someone called the Rosh Yeshiva’s attention to his situation. The Rosh Yeshiva left the dancing circle and spoke quietly to my shver for a few minutes. He then returned to the dancing with my shver in tow, and my shver was fine for the rest of the chasunah. We don’t know what the Rosh Yeshiva told him but clearly he found the right words to console an elderly European yid, in his grief.

***

The Rosh Yeshiva was capable of displaying a sharp sense of humor. Talmidim often made their brissim in the Yeshiva, and the seudas bris, in the Yeshiva dining room. The Rosh Yeshiva liked to keep things moving, so as not to cut into morning seder. At the bris of one of my grandsons the Rosh Yeshiva asked me who was going to speak and I told him that my mechutan and I were going to speak. He didn’t look thrilled at the prospect but all he said was “so get started and zeit mekatzer”. My mechutan, a Rav and talmid chochom, spoke first. When it was my turn I began, tongue-in-cheek, with “I can’t compete with my mechutan’s Torah but maybe I can outdo him in being mekatzer.” I said my piece and sat down, and the Rosh Yeshiva leaned over and whispered to me, “He was more mekatzer than you, too!”

***

I would like to conclude with an incident reported to me by a 7^th grade Rebbi in a Yeshiva outside of New York. As part of a chol hamoed trip, he planned on taking his class to visit the Rosh Yeshiva; to see a gadol b’yisroel, hear divrei Torah, receive a bracha. One of the bochrim created a disturbance and the Rosh Yeshiva had to send him from the room. The Rosh Yeshiva took the time to calmly explain to the rest of the class that, as a matter of chinuch, the boy had to learn that actions have consequences.

Another, rather impertinent bochur suggested to the Rosh Yeshiva that perhaps the boy had learned his lesson and should be re-admitted. The Rosh Yeshiva responded that if he did that, not only would that negate the lesson to the bochur himself, but would give the rest of the class a contrary lesson – that, in fact, bad actions do not have consequences.

The interaction was handled with ultimate respect for the talmidim and illustrates how the Rosh Yeshiva could transform even sticky situations into teaching moments – not only for his own talmidim, but for  talmidim from another Yeshiva.

In truth, though, to the Rosh Yeshiva every yid was a talmid to whom he could impart Toras Emes.

Life goes on, but the passing of the Rosh Yeshiva zt’l leaves a void in my life, and in the lives of my family members, that can never be filled. Yehi zichro boruch.

On Visiting Your Rebbi on Yom Tov:

 On Visiting One’s Rebbi on Yom Tov: 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 Basis for the Obligation

“A person is obligated to visit his Rebbi on yom tov” (Sukkah 27a). The basis of this obligation is not simply a matter of honoring the Rebbi; rather it is intended to be a depiction of how a student must accept from his Rebbi. What kind of acceptance, specifically, is the obligation intending to depict?

At the end of parshas Ki Savo, in the context of Moshe delivering his final words to the nation after forty years in the desert, the posuk states (Devarim 29:3), “Hashem has not given you a heart to know… until this day” and Chazal comment, as quoted in Rashi, “No one can fathom the depths of his Rebbi’s mind… before forty years. Hence, Hashem was not strict with you until this day, but from now on He will be strict with you; and therefore, “Observe the words of this bris…”.

Time-Delayed Understanding

These words teach us an incredible insight: it is possible for the divrei Torah conveyed by the Rebbi to become actionable to the student only after a long interval from when they were received, for Chazal are very clear that after forty years since the teaching was received there is more of a requirement that they be absorbed then there was at a time closer to when they were received.

Let us take careful note of the choice of words employed by Chazal to express this requirement –  amida al daas HaRav, “to fathom the depths of the Rebbi’s mind”. What form of understanding, exactly, are Chazal intending to convey with these words?

We are familiar, by now, with our oft-repeated explanation of the answer Chazal give (Yerushalmi Brachos 5:2) in response to the question, why was the Havdalah recitation inserted into the “…endow man with intelligence, daas” blessing? They answer, “without daas, whence separation?” Intelligence is required to distinguish between different things. In Hebrew the word daas implies a connection; a joining together, as in (Beraishis 4:1) “And Odom knew Chava, his wife…”. An ox is not safeguarded if it is handed over to a watchman who lacks daas, because the watchman does not “connect” to the responsibility he was entrusted with and is therefore unreliable.

We elsewhere explained the phrase “without daas, when separation?” by noting that being able to grasp when things are connected and when they are divergent are two sides of the same coin and a person who cannot grasp connections cannot grasp divergencies, either. Thus Havadalah is inserted into the bracha of daas because it is daas that enables us to grasp the distinctions between sacred and mundane, etc. – and grasping these distinctions is critical to our ability to serve Hashem.

Knowing Our Rebbeim

We come now to our central, novel point: It is possible for a student to understand the Torah teachings of his Rebbi on the deepest level; his understanding can even extend to being able to build new ideas on the basis of his Rebbi’s concepts, but he may still be totally bereft of the ability to “to fathom the depths of the Rebbi’s mind”. A student can only be said to have that ability when, in the process of absorbing his Rebbi’s teachings, he perceives the connection between the Rebbi’s individuality – his unique character – and  the Torah he is imparting. As we said, the ability to discern connections and disconnections is the hallmark of daas.

Just as, with his ability to understand, the student can process his Rebbi’s wisdom, so also, with the ability “to fathom the depths of the Rebbi’s mind”, the student can process the Rebbi’s unique connection with that wisdom.

There are tell-tale signs that reliably enable the observer to determine whether or not students have this ability. For example, there are perceptive and sharp students who, nonetheless, find it difficult to listen to the same thoughts expressed multiple times by the Rebbi. By and large this is an indication that they lack the ability to “to fathom the depths of the Rebbi’s mind”. Similarly, these same students will become fidgety when they do not clearly understand what the Rebbi is teaching.

[Perhaps we can say that students who exhibit those symptoms are focused exclusively on the content of the shiur and are oblivious to an entirely different level of understanding, which is focused on why these particular concepts, expressed in that particular way, using these particular words and manner of delivery, could not have emanated from anyone other than the Rebbi who is currently delivering them.

Thus if they have heard this shiur before, they do not see the point in focusing on that content again. And if they do not understand the shiur’s content they see no benefit in continuing to listen to it. They see the shiur only in terms of its content. Whereas to students who are sensitive to the nuances of the relationship between the Rebbi’s presentation and his personality, there will always be new facets revealed about that relationship even in a reprise of the shiur. New facets will be revealed that transcend the content of the shiur]

Be a Growing Person – Not an Ox!

Now, the Gemara teaches that “a one-day old ox is already called an ox” (Baba Kama 65a). An ox has its salient characteristics at birth and those remain essentially static for the duration of the ox’s life. But the abilities of human beings evolve over time. The amount of time separating a just-obtained but dormant kernel of knowledge, from that knowledge in actualized form, is a function of the significance of that kernel of knowledge.

The most rarefied form of knowledge transfer is that of a student absorbing the Torah teachings of his Rebbi, and the most rarefied subset of that variety of knowledge transfer is the ability to “to fathom the depths of the Rebbi’s mind”. Therefore it is not surprising that Chazal assessed the gap between dormant and actualized for this ability to be forty years. “No one can fathom the depths of his Rebbi’s mind before forty years” – that is, forty years from when the knowledge transfer for this form of knowledge began.

To one who properly considers what is involved, the extent of the soul-penetrating labors required to receive and absorb Torah wisdom is truly mind-boggling. Anyone who deludes himself into thinking that the fruits of obtaining Torah knowledge are ripe just at the moment the knowledge is received, and if the benefits of the knowledge are not immediately apparent, they will never be apparent – such a person is studying in the manner of “a one-day old ox is already called an ox”, since he fails to appreciate the distinction between the potential of dormant knowledge and the actualization of that knowledge. His one-dimensional view of Torah knowledge acquisition does not take into account the fact that the knowledge takes form over time and does not come into full bloom immediately. The “ox” that he started off with will be the same “ox” that he will continue to have as time passes. Such a person will not achieve the ability “to fathom the depths of the Rebbi’s mind” since absorbing that form of knowledge can only happen over time.

The Unique Segulah of Visiting One’s Rebbi on Yom Tov

Visiting one’s Rebbi on the holidays is uniquely suited to absorbing the teaching we refer to as “fathoming the depths of the Rebbi’s mind”. The purpose of the holiday visit is not to hear this or that particular teaching from the Rebbi. Its goal is, rather, to understand the workings of the Rebbi’s mind. The student will walk away from the visit with a deeper understanding of the relationship between the Rebbi’s essence and the Torah he imparts.

[Perhaps the less formal setting typical of such a visit will provide another level of insight into the Rebbi’s individuality and its relationship to his Torah, and the repeated exposure to that setting, holiday visit after holiday visit, will provide the time element necessary in order to bring the additional insight into full bloom.]

May we all be zoche this yom tov and every yom tov to deepening our understanding not only of the Torah we have learned from our Rebbeim, but also of how the Torah of our Rebbeim is intimately bound with the persons of our Rebbeim themselves.

(Based on Igros U’Ksovim, Igeres 12)

 

The Amalek – Paras Connection: Adapted from the Torah of Rav Yitzchok Hutner, zt”l

 The Amalek – Paras Connection: 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”.

 

What is Amalek Doing Here?

Purim is coming and, as every child knows, Purim is when we celebrate our victory over the forces of Amalek. Yet the events of the Purim story took place during the galus, the exile, of Paras. We were subjects of the Persian kings, who ruled over Eretz Yisroel, and at whose pleasure we could – or could not – build the second Bais HaMikdash.

It behooves us to examine how Amalek – a descendant of Edom, whose galus we are currently in the midst of – insinuated itself into the much earlier galus of Paras.

The Torah, in the parsha of the Bris Bain Ha’besarim (Beraishis 15)  alludes to the entire panoply of exiles with which the Jewish nation will be subjected.

The kingdom of Yishmael is notable by its absence from the list of the kingdoms that exiled Yisroel; after all, Yisroel was subjugated by them for several generations. The Maharal takes note of this omission in Ner Mitzva  and he explains it as follows.

To qualify as one of the four kingdoms prophesized in the Torah, one of two conditions has to be met. Either rulership must be wrested by force from Jewish control, as was the case with respect to Bavel, or rulership must pass from the hands of a nation that took it from Jewish control by force, to another nation built on the ruins of the first one, as was the case with respect to Paras and Yavan (Greece). Yishmael is not counted among the four because it lacks both of those two conditions; it did not take control of rulership by force, nor did it inherit rulership from the ruins of a preceding kingdom.

Fueled by a Downfall

Chazal taught us in Megilla 6a that there is a relationship of “when one is ascendant, the other is descendant” between Yaakov and Esav (see Rashi on Beraishis 25:33). “If someone, speaking about Yerushalayim and Rome (a reference to Esav) tells you that both are thriving, do not believe it. If they tell you that they are both destroyed, do not believe it. But if they tell you that one is thriving and the other destroyed, believe it.”

This relationship was already in place when Rivka consulted Shem, who informed her that “one kingdom will become mightier than the other kingdom” (Beraishis 25:23). Shem was telling her that the relationship between the kingdoms of Yisroel and Edom would be inverse – “when one is ascendant, the other is descendant”. This relationship does not pertain to Yishmael; his rise does not depend on Yisroel’s fall.

Here is how we must understand this state of affairs on a deeper level. It took the lapse of three generations for the dross of profane to be filtered out of the lineage of our forefathers. Avrohom fathered Yishmael and Yitzchok fathered Esav, both of whom were unworthy. Only beginning with Yaakov was the dross expunged; none of his children strayed.

Now, until kedusha achieves a state of complete decontamination, it is tolerant, by definition, of the presence of that which is tamei. At that point kedusha and tumah are not in a “when one is ascendant, the other is descendant” relationship since the presence of kedusha does not immediately bring about a purging of tumah. They may coexist.

Only after kedusha is completely absolved of any taint of tumah, then and only then are kedusha and tumah diametric opposites, and only then can it be said that “when one is ascendant, the other is descendant”; that each is built on the ruins of the other.

But until kedusha reaches that rarefied state of purity, the strength of the opposition between kedusha and tumah is insufficient to cause the ascendant of the pair to bring about the obliteration of the other of the pair. Only after kedusha achieves that milestone does the opposition between those two forces become a death-battle, such that the demise of one enlivens the other.

Thus the prophecy of “one kingdom will become mightier than the other kingdom”, which is tantamount, as Chazal explain, to the inverse relationship of “when one is ascendant, the other is descendant, could only have been said about Yaakov and Esav; the same inverse relationship could not have applied to Yitzchok and Yishmael, because there was still some dross associated with Yitzchok, who fathered not only Yaakov but also Esav – even though, certainly, Yishmael opposed Yitzchok in the same way that Esav opposed Yaakov.

In that light let us return to the words of the Maharal, who wrote that the kingdom of Yishmael is not counted as one of the four kingdoms to which Yisroel was exiled, even though it, too, subjugated Yisroel for several generations, since it did not take control of rulership by force, nor did it inherit rulership from the ruins of a preceding kingdom which took control of rulership by force. In our terminology, that is the equivalent of saying that Yishmael’s subjugation of Yisroel did not reach the level of “when one is ascendant, the other is descendant”. Yishmael’s subjugation was oppression by force but it cannot be said that the ascendancy of Yishmael was fueled by the downfall of Yisroel.

This explains why our salvation from the oppression of Paras came about  specifically through a reversal of fortunes, v’nahafoch hu. Not only did Yisroel prevail, but we prevailed by way of the downfall of our enemies. Why? Because Amalek, as represented by Haman, insinuated itself into the picture, instigating our danger, and our battles with Amalek always play out in a manner of “when one is ascendant, the other is descendant”, since Amalek is a descendant of Esav.

The King of Jew-Hatred

Preceding the chronicling of the Bris Bain Ha’besarim, the Torah, in Beraishis 14, relates the story of the war of the four kings against Avrohom. The Ramban explains – and this thought is similarly expressed by Chazal in Beraishis Rabbah 42:7 – that the four kings are a homiletic reference to the four kingdoms that are destined to oppress Yisroel.

One of the four kings is called “Sidal, king of the nations” and the Ramban writes that he is so called because he ruled over diverse nations. What is the significance of the reference to “nations”? Which nation was king of the “nations”? The Medrash explains that the “king” is actually a reference to Edom whose despotism extended over the nations of the world. Edom earned this distinction because all the kingdoms that preceded his were limited to one particular location but Edom imposed its will over “nations” in general.

The significance of Edom’s empire-building was that his antipathy toward Yisroel also extended beyond the borders of his own land; his poisonous incitement against the Jews was spread far and wide among other nations and he propagandized the other nations to induce in them as well the toxic venom of anti-Semitism.

In fact Edom was so identified with this trait that, when enumerating the four kings, the Torah refers to him as “Sidal, king of the nations” – as if to say that his empire of hatred crossed all borders and had no boundaries.

The Progression of Amalek’s Infiltration

If we want to pinpoint the beginnings of Edom’s incitement-spreading we would have to focus on the period of the exile of Paras. The entire Megillas Esther centers around Amalek’s incitement of Achashverosh against the Jews. Earlier in history, such as during the lifetime of Moshe, or during the epoch of the prophets, Amalek – a scion of Edom – directly waged war against Yisroel. Amalek’s interaction with Achashverosh was the first instance of Edom provoking a proxy – Achashverosh, king of Paras – into Jew-hatred.

At the time, this innovation of evil was limited to one kingdom, Paras, but the exiles become more onerous as they progress, so that in the fourth exile, which we are currently in the midst of, there are no geographic limits to Edom’s incitement; it spreads indiscriminately to all nations. “Sidal, king of the nations”.

Let us trace this phenomenon through the sequence of exiles. The first of the four, Bavel, did not have Amalek participation. This was followed by the exile of Paras which was a reflection of Amalek’s infiltration into a single other nation. (The apparent absence of Amalek from galus Yavan is discussed in Pachad Yitzchok, Chanukah Maamar 15.)

The final galus of Edom reflects Amalek’s infiltration into every other nation.

The prevailing theme of our exiles in general is the inverse relationship between Edom and Yisroel, such that even when the nation oppressing us is not Edom, Edom’s fingerprints are visible. This was especially the case with respect to the galus of Paras – the first where Edom/Amalek “spread its wings” over a non-Edom nation.

We daven that just as Hashem saved us from that first galus exposure to Edom, he save us now, when we are in the thick of the actual galus Edom, so that we may again sing, “la’yehudim haysa orah, v’simcha, v’sasson, v’yikar!”

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.