Who will convey the derech further?
 |
| My grandfather, Rabbi Dov Yehuda Schochet zt"l as a talmid in Telshe (sitting, second from left). |
וידאו: צפו: המצגת על ׳טעלז׳ שריגשה רבבות בעולם התורה - כיכר השבת
http://www.kikar.co.il/video.php?vid=213152-312905
h/t to my cousin, Reb Mendy Elishevitz for notifying me of the video, and to my cousin Reb Moshe Daniel Schochet for the picture.
What is going on at Shaar haTorah under R' Kalman Epstein? One would hope that the yeshiva named for Grodno's and run by Rav Shimon Shkop's great-grandson would still be learning according to R' Shimon's derekh, even if (I suspect) the derekh hachaim pulled more to Agudah norms...
ReplyDeleteBut I really don't know.
I don't know...but I thought there is some continuation, whether with R. Yitzchok Sorotzkin in Lakewood (where there is a yomim noraim minyan according to the Telshe way), R. Ausband in R'dale, Cleveland perhaps to a degree...I did hear reports that the Telshe minyan in Boro Park was supposed to be going out of business around now though.
ReplyDeleteSee http://kehilalinks.jewishgen.org/telz/telshe.html,in the sections that explicate the Telzer derech. No one is learning that way nowadays - except perhaps yechidim, like a certain blogger in Monsey... ;-)
ReplyDeleteDavening according to a Telzer "nusach" without a Telzer derech is the same sickness as davening according to a Roedelheim (or Tefillas Yeshurun) siddur without TIDE. Piryo zarak, klipaso achal.
ReplyDelete"Telshe was the first yeshiva to hold what are now known as pilpul shiurim (shiurim klali'im - lectures on topics rather than on the text) and to divide students into classes ("machlokos") graded by level."
ReplyDeleteThey need to do more of that in chedarim. Yeah, I said it. The current method is to grind through page after page of first Chumash and then Mishnah. Kids can go through 10 years of school and never pick up fundamental concepts of faith or law. Rather than forcing 5th graders through chapter after chapter of say Mishnah Shabbos, they could pick some interesting Mishnot which give a better flavor and appreciation of what the Mishnah is about.
If only Hashem had given us the funds...
ReplyDeleteIt took unique divine intervention, an act of God, to stop your yeshiva?
DeleteHow about, "we couldn't raise funds," or, "there wasn't enough interest."
Sounds less arrogant.
"We couldn't raise funds" might sound more humble to you, but in reality is more likely to come from a place of far more egotism; the person who overestimates the control he has over the world around him.
DeletePeople do, but success and failure are up to Him.
Stop what yeshiva? I wasn't referring to myself personally, I was referring to the collective of like-minded individuals (who to a certain degree can be identified as the people associated with The Aishdas Society). I have never actively tried to raise funds to start a yeshiva. OTOH, there definitely was interest when we were discussing the idea.
DeleteThey are to telz what the malochim are to chabad....
ReplyDeleteThose peyos.... Anybody in telz looked like that?....
To be fair, I don't think even in Brisk they looked like that! :-)
ReplyDeleteSo how does a sorotskin from cleveland end up looking like that?
ReplyDeleteContemporary Brisker fashion.
ReplyDeleteSHEKER !!!
ReplyDeleteWhat about the Sephardi Almana kid he pushed away ?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5vPPFzTtZOs
You're right!
DeleteThe antithesis of the idealism of RYLB's Yavneh school system.
DeleteParallel conversation at https://www.facebook.com/bigdei.shesh/posts/10154617783188389
ReplyDeleteIn what way do you think the that the derech of Telshe was superior to the derech of Brisk?
ReplyDeleteBrisk asks what, Telshe asks why. Brisk categorizes, Telshe analyzes. Brisk negates introspection; Telshe demands it. Brisk has no vision beyond the Beis Medrash; Telshe wants to transform the nation.
ReplyDelete"Brisk asks what, Telshe asks why"
DeleteBut of course Brisk tells you - that gufa is the chisaron in Telshe, the reason for the superiority of the derech of Brisk over Telshe.
As far as the rest, Micha Berger is correct in his response.
As long as we realize that the data disproved the Yeshivish take on the Nefesh haChaim. We aren't looking at a community that is notably free of divorce, abuse, fiscal shinanigans, etc... in comparison to other religious groups that don't possess the Emes.
DeleteIt is also against the Gra....
The Brisker Derekh, without the unwritten Brisker culture, is just watering our weeds.
The relationship of Torah to the soul: A comparison to rain for the ground, it causes what was planted there to grow, whether a sam hachaim or a sam hamaves, a poison. Similarly, Torah causes what is in his heart to grow. If what is in his heart is good, his yir’ah will grow; if what is in his heart is a “root sprouting poison weed and wormwood” then the bitterness that is in his head will grow. As it is written, “the righteous will walk in it, and sinners will stumble in it” (Hoshea 14:10, as explained by Chazal), and as it is written, “To those who go to the right side of it, it is a medicine of life; to those who go to its left, it is a deadly poison,” (Shabbos 88b).
Therefore, one must cleanse one’s heart every day, before study and after it, of impure attitudes and middos, with a fear of sin and with good deeds.
- Even Sheleimah 1:11, c.f. Bei’ur haGra Mishlei 24:31, 19:15, 25:4
I could never understand the arrest of curiosity at the point of what. Natural inquisitiveness, not to mention intellectual ambition, should strive for why.
DeleteIt's not a matter of curiosity or inquisitiveness. It's a matter of the correct way to learn. A Brisker can be curious from today until tomorrow, but that doesn't mean they should compromise their standards in learning to satisfy their curiosity.
Delete"Compromise standards in learning???" If you go beyond What to Why how is that a compromise???
DeleteActually, curbing your curiosity and not asking every question that could interest you would be the actual lowering one's standards.
DeleteThe Brisker approach is ideologically driven. I already mentioned the idea that Brisk today believes that our job is to learn, and learning shapes us by itself without our needing to pay attention to middos or whys. Also, they believe that halakhah itself is the first principle, and therefore can only be explained in terms of other halakhos.
(Even RYBS bought into this second notion. His dream hashkafic project was to lay out a full philosophy. But not based on miqrah, aggadic material from Chazal, or the rishonim. Rather, he dreamed of starting fresh, developing a complete hashkafah from halakhah.
But with this worldview, halakhah's only possible "why" would be found in legal mechanics. More the "why does it work that way" of "vos?" than the "why did Hashem make it that way" of "fahr vos?"
"If you go beyond What to Why how is that a compromise???"
DeleteYes it's a compromise. I don't believe that the two of you don't know what I'm going to say, but I will say it anyway. (and to Micha - there is likely an ideological component in "what not why" but I think what I'm going to write below is a larger part of it.)
Once we move from the realm of "what" to "why", things generally become a free-for-all, anything- goes mash up of taamei hamitzvos, say whatever you think or feel, without solid proofs or backing. In other words, by its nature, the "why" is not as rigorous as the "what". Thus dealing with "why"s is a less rigorous enterprise, and a lowering of standards in learning. Or a tradeoff of standards for the sake of curiosity, however you want to describe it.
When you're dealing with whys, it's often more "er lernt zich" than learning the Torah (as the Brisker Rav once said in a totally different context.)
Rav Shimon's derekh is as structured as R' Chaim's.
DeleteI fear you are speaking from ignorance.
Meanwhile, one derekh ONLY learns what, the other learns both what and why. It's Brisker derekh that is more limited; as you admitted, less curious. It opens less of the Torah inherent in each sugya.
What RMB said. Zil gmor Sha'arei Yosher 5:2. And of course it's ideological. See the Brisker Rov on the Akeidah.
DeleteBTW, the derachim of the Rogatchover and RYEngel also go beyond the What to the Why. Both pretty decent lamdanim.
On a tangent, see the Hakdama to the Marcheshes, where he pokes fun at the Brisker Derech as "Chemistry" (IIRC).
Certainly both great lamdanim. But (I've heard from Dr. Haym S.) R Chaim did not like the Rogatchover's derech exactly because he brought philosophical dimensions into halacha and lomdus, philosophical categories not inherent to halacha.
DeleteOf course I greatly value Rav Yosef Engel and the Rogatchover, as well as R Shimon and R YL Bloch and RAY Bloch. (I have some original copies of R YL Bloch's Shiurei Halacha from Telz.) However, particularly from what I see in the world around me, such learning often devolves into the free-for-all that I described. It's a danger inherent to the derech of Telz, notwithstanding the greatness of the gaonim mentioned.
The two of you can of course disagree, and lean towards Telz over Brisk. But again, Brisk holds that the chisaron in Telz is the very aspect which you view as the maaleh. And as obvious, my inclination is towards the Brisker mahalach.
Micha, I fear that you are ignorant of this style of learning that takes place today.
Anonymous, let me put that fear to rest. I have been learning Brisker derekh (on the side) since the early 1980s, when my father and I would go to Boston for RYBS's annual yarchei kallah.
DeleteHave you seen RYGB's survey of derachim at http://www.aishdas.org/rygb/derachim.htm
or my autobiographical http://www.aishdas.org/asp/brisk-and-telz?
RYGB also has 4 examples of Telzher lomdus at http://www.aishdas.org/asp/brisk-and-telz.
Micha, I think you may have misunderstood my comment.
DeleteYou said about my analysis of Telz "I fear you are speaking from ignorance."
To which I replied that I fear you're ignorant of the style of learning that takes place today, meaning the free-for-all, anything goes, taamei hamitzvos mash-up, which I believe is an end result of Telz-style focus on "why".
Where is this Telz-style learning occuring today???
DeleteI am of the opinion that the learning style of Rav M Rosensweig and his talmidim, as well as talmidim of Rav Aharon Lichtenstein are actually closer to Telz than Brisk because of their penchant for bringing philosophy and taamei hamitzvos into lomdus. Certainly true of Rav Moshe Lichtenstein.
DeleteRYGB, you may have missed my question below:
DeleteCurious - what reason did the Bloch einikel give you for the superiority of the derech of Brisk over that of Telz?
Nothing coherent other than that Brisk won and ha been universally adopted. I doubt he could even define Telshe vs. Brisk.
DeleteBrisk has a vision beyond the Beis Medrash. They "just" don't bring it into the beis medrash. The truth is, R' Chaim Brisker was as much middos and ahavas haberios centered as a Mussarnik.
ReplyDeleteHis home was open to all, and generally had homeless people living in it.
To quote just one story as told by R JB Soloveitchik (as transcribed in the Rav, vol II, pg 41:
Rav Chaim once came out of his house and saw little kids having an argument. He inquired as to what the problem was and was told that they were “playing horse” but none of them wanted to be the horse. One kid wanted to be the driver, one kid wanted to be the passenger, but no one wanted to be the horse. Rav Chaim said “I’ll be the horse.”
The kids put the rope around Rav Chaim and he was the horse. The story does not end there. The kids tied “their horse” to the tree. Then they became hungry, so they went home to have a snack, leaving Rav Chaim tied to the tree. The Gabbai came out and saw Rav Chaim tied to the tree. The Gabbai took out a pocket knife and was about to cut the rope. Rav Chaim told him not to do that because it would sadden the kids. Instead, Rav Chaim advised the Gabbai to go get the children and ask them to untie their horse.
This is an example of a “Rav Chessed” par excellence.
(Along similar lines, I recently learned that R' Aharon Lichtenstein was not only the Rosh Yeshiva sitting in the front of the beis medrash, he was also the candy man.)
The Mussar Dispute was not over goals, but strategy.
R Chaim Volozhiner describes Torah study by comparison to a miqvah -- you are a different person even once you emerge.
In the Netziv's Volozhin and in Brisk, this was taken descriptively. Torah changes you. Therefore, they saw no need to consciously pursue a perfection of middos or have a mission statement for one's life. We learn, and all of that takes care of itself.
Mussar, and from there to Telzh and other yeshivos, too this idea prescriptively. If you want to fulfill Torah study you must do so in a way that fosters good middos and a pursuit of ideals. Conscious attention to such development becomes not only necessary, but primary.
The problem with Brisker Derekh as people think of it today is that it's preserved in the beis medrash only, and not the R Chaim who spent his afternoon tied to that tree.
Any comments on these relatively recent works related to R. Shimon Shkop zt"l?
ReplyDelete1) http://www.magnespress.co.il/Book/חשיבה+משפטית+בישיבות+ליטא.aspx
2) https://www.mosadharavkook.com/shop/שערים-לשערי-יושר/
I enjoyed the PhD thesis version of #1, when it was available for free online.
DeleteI think it may violate hasagas gevul for me to share the copy I downloaded, now that it's both taken down, and available for sale.
RMB et al,
DeleteI think it should be clarified that Reb Chaim was not the true progenitor of the Brisker Derech. His son Reb Velvel, the Griz, the Brisker Rav gave the derech its positions and pathways. V'duk.
I.e., Reb Chaim was not a Brisker. :-)
DeleteAlternatively... (To make reference to a Facebook comment...)
DeleteYou could add True Brisk ™ to the list of defunct institutions you can wax nostalgic about and mourn.
Don't have the yichus (actual or intellectual) to make the claim. Maybe "True Bechhofen." :-)
DeleteRYGB,
ReplyDeleteCurious - what reason did the Bloch einikel give you for the superiority of the derech of Brisk over that of Telz?