Q&A at Shaalvim, Feb. 10, 2025

So what does Rabbi think is, does Rabbi think there's a value, hashkafa, of having, taking a perspective on current events such as the hostage deal? The, the, this, there's certainly value. On one level, there's value because it's, without chas v'shalom implying any kind of clinical detachment, rachmana litzlan, and lack of complete involvement and identification with what's happening, that it's a sugya in Torah. And a person should know what's right al pi Torah, what's wrong al pi Torah. Even if he's not the one who's in a position to make that determination, but a person still should know what's right and what's wrong al pi Torah even if he's not the one who's calling the shots. You know, if it's, if a person is a ben Eretz Yisrael and has voting rights in Eretz Yisrael, so it's certainly something which is relevant to what he takes into account in deciding who to vote for. So I think a person is supposed to have, to try to know what the Torah's perspective is. I don't think a person in general, with anything in life, a person is also, always supposed to try to be productively engaged in whatever the issue at hand is. You know, sometimes we feel that we should be engaged or we have a yetzer hara to be engaged or sometimes it's a yetzer hatov which is misdirected to be engaged even when it's not, even when it's not productive to do so. If we have a, if we know someone who's not well or something, rachmana litzlan, who's going through hard times, so we absolutely should be involved to the extent that whatever we can be doing and should be doing to help and to reach out, but to sort of just feel badly beyond that, where it's not productive, a person's supposed to be productively engaged. So here, too, there's such a thing as being, you know, not productively engaged. And there's a point at which it's bittul Torah, at which it's hocking, you know, and we're not talking about that. What are some of the key and core values that are given over at Yeshiva University that you wouldn't necessarily get somewhere else? So maybe we'll, maybe we'll reword the question a little bit. You know, I'm at YU, I've been there for many, many years, Baruch Hashem, so I'll talk about what I know and, and if anyone is in a position to and it's productive for them, they can use that and apply that to draw whatever distinctions and differentiations are helpful in their context. The many I think elements of the hashkafa the the approach to Torah life which one can be mekabel and are are reinforced throughout one's years in in YU. Avodas Hashem requires balance. It requires balance even within Torah and mitzvos to know for what mitzvah a person is supposed to be mafsik Talmud Torah and for what mitzvos not. The fact that on a hierarchy we're told that תלמוד תורה כנגד כולם. The fact that וכל חפציך לא ישוו בה and yet there are mitzvos when a person is mechuyav to be mafsik Talmud Torah. So it's it's not as simple as just saying well תלמוד תורה כנגד כולם so therefore nothing can ever justify stepping out of the Beis Medrash. No. If it's a מצוה שאי אפשר לעשותה ע"י אחרים for instance so then a person is mechuyav to to be mafsik in in his Talmud Torah. So Talmud Torah so religious life Avodas Hashem on the one hand a person is single-minded. He's single-minded in that he's committed to he's devoted to he's dedicated to doing ratzon Hashem. But ratzon Hashem itself at times points in this direction and at other times it points in in another direction. Again not not because chas v'shalom there's obviously that's totally consistent and totally holistic but but ratzon Hashem isn't monolithic in the sense that it always translates into Talmud Torah or that it always translates into this mitzvah or that mitzvah. Ratzon Hashem is is sufficiently broad that it requires that a person live a life of balance and a person has to know how to balance again Talmud Torah with other mitzvos. A person has to know how to balance Talmud Torah with

יפה תלמוד תורה עם דרך ארץ שיגיעת שניהם משכחת עון.

A person has to know how to how to balance has to know how to balance those two. Within his own life depending upon a person's kochos hanefesh a person has to figure out what the balance is between Talmud Torah and and other other mitzvos. I think in the Simcha Raz writes in his collection of stories about Rav Aryeh Levin that that how did Rav Aryeh Levin become the the Rav of the of all the prisoners under the British Mandate? So at the time Rav Kook who was the first Chief Rabbi was approached by the by the British that they wanted to have a Jewish chaplain. They they didn't want a Jewish chaplain not out of concern for the welfare of the prisoners. They thought that if they kept them somewhat happy so that they would cause them less trouble. This was no this wasn't an act of altruism on on their part. So they approached Rav Kook in his capacity as Chief Rabbi that he should recommend someone. And he was the one who recommended Rav Aryeh Levin. Why did he recommend Rav Aryeh Levin? Because Rav Kook this is the way the story is presented there that Rav Kook saw that that was the tikkun. That was the way Rav Aryeh Levin the way his nefesh the way his neshama was going to achieve its perfection. One wonders what optometrist Rav Kook went to and where he where he got his glasses and if one could buy a pair of glasses like that. But but so we're all different. So even clearly Rav Aryeh Levin okay so he didn't stop learning but he obviously didn't learn as much as as if he wouldn't have that tremendous devotion and dedication that he showed to to all these prisoners. It obviously came there's only 24 hours in the day even for a tzaddik there's only 24 hours in the day. Depending upon a person's kochos hanefesh also. So avodas Hashem is a life of balance. Again, balance within Torah and mitzvos, balance between Torah and making hishtadlus for parnassa, balance between bein adam l'chaveiro, bein adam l'makom, etc., balance in so many, so many areas. One of the things that we try to transmit is that hashkafa of a person has a single-minded focus and a single commitment to do ritzon Hashem, but that gufa requires that a person lead a balanced life, a balanced life between intensity and between me'urav im habriyos. Wherever you turn, everything and everything in Yahadus is a balance. If you very well likely might get it in one shiur, maybe if for some reason you don't get it in one shiur you'll have to listen to two shiurim, but if you hear Rav Schachter give a shiur, so you'll hear everyone quoted again in terms of the political-religious spectrum, everyone quoted from Rav Kook to the Minchas Elazar. And you'll hear chachmei Yisrael from across the spectrum quoted. So obviously in life a person has to follow a certain derech. There are different drachim within Torah, within the contemporary olam hatorah there are different drachim and a person follows a particular derech. The fact that a person follows a particular derech doesn't mean that he doesn't recognize and that he doesn't respect those who are legitimate gedolim, legitimate gedolim who don't necessarily represent that derech. You don't have to follow the Minchas Elazar's hashkafos or shittos to recognize that the Minchas Elazar was a great, was an adam gadol. You don't have to follow all Rav Kook's hashkafos or shittos to recognize what a gadol he was. And there's an openness that there isn't a political litmus test, there's a Torah test for gadlus, there isn't a political litmus test for gadlus. That kind of openness to the whole spectrum of talmidei chachamim I think is another element of the hashkafa. The openness to chochma, chochma shouldn't be understood synonymously with contemporary culture. Unfortunately contemporary culture is less and less about chochma and more and more about craziness. So sometimes for chochma you have to go back a little bit in history, you can't so much look in contemporary times, but the openness to chochma, chochma bagoyim is something which in addition to its intrinsic value, it seems—I don't know that it has to be this way, but empirically it does seem to be this way, it doesn't need to be this way, but empirically it is this way—that often there's a correlation between a person having had a sound secular education and not being extreme in an unhealthy sense in his relationship with the outside world. For instance, when there are public health directives, so then a healthy balanced approach says that even though one obviously filters out and rejects anything and everything from the outside world which is neged Torah, which is not consistent with Torah, which is not compatible with Torah, but anything which is correct and anything which is valid and anything which we're supposed to also take into account what's said in the outside world, that a person doesn't... What you reject and what you accept, it seems to correlate that usually, usually Bnei Torah who have some secular education usually are more successful at striking that balance. Again, maybe the balance is reject 99.5 percent and accept 0.5 percent, but whatever the right balance is, you have to maintain that that balance. I think in Yeshiva we try to recognize what the boundaries of rabbinic expertise and therefore authority are, and that people should be Kafuf to what Rabbanim say in those areas, and that Rabbanim themselves should be mindful of not venturing outside of those areas. So in his day, when Rav Soloveitchik was asked, was it permissible to relinquish Shetachim if that would bring peace to Medinat Yisrael? So he used to answer that he thought that it was permissible, that if that would ensure peace, that it was permissible to relinquish Shetachim, but whether in fact that would be accomplished was something that needed to be assessed militarily and politically, and that you have to be a military and political expert to speak to and that he was neither. So Halacha Lema'aseh he wouldn't say whether he was in favor of doing so, he said the conceptual Halachic framework was that, yes, one would relinquish Shetachim if that would ensure peace. The Hitnatkut in Azza would be correct if it if it would have if it if it would have if it if it would have brought peace, but whether or not it's going to bring peace is something which isn't, that's already a political assessment. In the same way the Halachic framework is if there's a Safek Sakana so the Choleh shouldn't fast on Yom Kippur. Is there a Safek Sakana requires a medical assessment. So the doctor, the Rav is an expert in Halacha and the doctor is an expert in medicine. The Rav is an expert in Halacha and and there are military people who, when their military judgment is not skewed by their own ideologies, are experts in military matters, and the same thing for politicians who also they can potentially be experts in political matters. So that's a big Yesod, that on the one hand, to recognize the the the expertise and to be Kafuf to Rabbanim within the areas which are where the question is Halachic, but when there are variables as part of the Halachic Shaila which are non-Halachic, the medical assessments, the military assessments, the political assessments, that isn't the expertise of a Rav necessarily, and that he himself looks beyond that. That's also drawing those lines is also I think an element of the Hashkafa that we seek to impart. I think there are probably different approaches, there's a certain general approach to Chinuch Habonot and again I'm not talking about particulars of what the exact curriculum is, but whether the goal of Chinuch Habonot is also part of their spiritual development is that that's linked to intellectual development as well, I think is also a... I think we're probably on schedule to violate this in a few minutes from now so it makes me feel doubly uncomfortable in saying it but you know most of us struggle with having kavana in tefilla but many of us also just disregard what Chazal say is necessary to have kavana in tefilla which is that Chazal tell us that we can't simply flip a switch that you can't transition from I don't know some other involvement and then just all of a sudden get up and davven that a person needs time to clear his mind from what he was doing beforehand and be ready to be omeid lifnei hamlech. You know the same way if you're you know if you're in shape the way I am you know if you have to run up the steps to get to shul on time so it's not until halfway through Shmoneh Esrei that you stop panting and so even if you're even if you're in better shape as as you all are better shape than that but you know sort of psychologically or or mentally you know we'll be in a similar position. So Chazal say that tefilla requires hachona. I'm not sure how much attention we we pay to that. So that's maybe one response. Another response and again neither of these is intended to be exhaustive is that I think most if not all of us have had moments in our life when we feel that we did davven with kavana. And and if you think back to what those moments were so those moments were when we felt a very deep pressing urgent need. And and then we did have kavana. So what does that show? It means that we are capable of kavana. It's not that you know living in ה' תשפ"ה that most of us are no longer capable of kavana. No we are capable but what does it mean? It means that normally when we davven we don't really feel the need. It's just something that we're doing, it's just something on our schedule, it's just an obligation but we don't experience the neediness. We don't experience the neediness so then we sort of have to push ourselves to have kavana as opposed to the kavana coming naturally. And when we experience need so then the kavana is there naturally. So the Rambam has a very interesting phrase in פרק א' הלכות תפילה הלכה ב' when he defines the d'oraisa of tefilla. He says that a person begins with shevach and then he says shoel tzrachav or צרכין שהוא צריך להן. He has this double lashon of again either tzrachin or tzrachav either way the point is the same shehu tzorech lahen. So it should be shoel tzrachav. What do you need the shehu tzorech lahen? So shoel tzrachav it can be something purely objective. Objectively a person needs health, objectively a person needs parnassa. Shehu tzorech lahen means that the person feels the need. It's a verb, it's not just a noun. He feels, he experiences the need. Tefilla is about feeling and experiencing and being in touch with our dependence upon Hakadosh Baruch Hu and if we felt the neediness so then kavana would be natural but since we don't feel the neediness so then kavana isn't natural and that's why it's such a struggle if we were more at... attuned to our absolute dependence upon Hakadosh Baruch Hu, and therefore our neediness, so then presumably kavanah would be something more natural. How should we relate to machlokesen in machshava? I don't remember all these questions that you had. You don't have the notebook here? Okay. Yeah. For example, a machlokes between the Rambam and the Kuzari on a very fundamental nekuda in machshava. How should we be relating to it on a personal level? Not every machlokes is one that trickles down to a personal level. And then, you know, the multiple opinions amongst the Chachmei Yisrael, amongst the Chachmei Hamasorah have tremendously enriched our masorah. Obviously, our masorah is richer for having both the Rambam and Rabbi Yehuda Halevi than it would be if we had, you know, if you have to go to a desert island, I think some interviewer had that gimmick or something. If you're going to go to what three books would you take with you? So we don't want to take only three books. We want to take our whole, if we're going to go to a desert island, we want to maybe just take your Bar-Ilan, I guess. But you want to take everything. You don't want to choose between the Chovos Halevavos and the Rambam and Rabbi Yehuda Halevi. So the first thing I think is to recognize that the differences help enrich our masorah. Now, there are some differences in machshava and in hashkafa which have very real applications, you know, to sort of how a person reacts or processes things. I'm not sure that there's a formula. Sometimes, you know, one view is more in the mainstream and the other view is, you know, less so, in which case obviously that carries weight. But other times, I don't know that there's a formula in terms of how a person's going to integrate it into his life. Is there a particular aspect of avodas Hashem that Rebbe thinks Bnei Yeshiva should be more focused on? I have this bad habit when I get questions of sort of projecting, you know, the question's about someone else and I tend to, you know, answer it in a self-centered way by projecting and in that vein, so I would say, you know, it's hard to talk about one element that needs attention. There are lots of elements. Someone gave me a copy of this, not really a book, it's more of a small monograph. It was written by the famous psychiatrist Rabbi Dr. Abraham J. Twerski, olav hashalom. So he was ma'arich yamim. I think he lived into his, certainly into his 80s, maybe upper 80s. So when he was 80 years old, he wrote this little book and such a beautiful title, When I Grow Up. So this is being written by an 80-year-old man who's had, you know, by most if not everyone's estimation a very productive career in helping people and a very prolific author. And he writes, you know, When I Grow Up. And the theme that he writes about, again, he writes very self-disparagingly and therefore it should be taken with a grain of salt obviously. He said, you know, when I was a little boy, he said, I was insecure. He says, now I'm an old man of 80 and I'm still insecure. And when I was a little boy, I don't remember now anymore whether I'm quoting accurately, so I'm just... making up the examples, I'm not sure if I'm quoting anymore but just to illustrate what the what his general point was: I craved attention and people's approval, and now at age 80 I still crave attention and I still crave attention and look for people's approval, Kahane ve-chahane. And and his point is, you know, how many of us really change ourselves for the better in terms of character? How many people, how many how many people really change themselves for the better in in terms of correcting flaws, in terms of addressing weaknesses? You know, the the the comment is is known from Rav Yisrael Salanter. Rav Yisrael Salanter said it's easier to learn Shas than it is to be mesaken one middah. You know, this was before all the English translations of Shas, before Schottenstein, so it wasn't that he thought that finishing Shas was going to be was going to be particularly easy when when he said that. And and, you know, if it when again when one looks in the mirror, so what Rav Yisrael said, it it it resonates. So does what, you know, Rabbi Doctor Abraham J. Twersky said. So it, you know, at your age, you don't have much of a frame of reference here. You don't have, you know, you can't really, I don't know how meaningful it is to look back at the, you know, where you were 10 years ago and and where you are today. And it isn't necessarily helpful to look at where you were two months ago and where you are today because, you know, these kinds of changes require time. But it it's certainly something to be mindful of to it it requires really a daily commitment. If a person is aware of a middah that he has that needs to be addressed, so it requires slow, painstaking, consistent, relentless work to, you know, to, you know, if a person is blessed to reach age 80, you know, to, you know, to aspire to to write an essay 'now that I have grown up' as opposed to 'when I grow up'. I think that that's certainly one of many other areas, but we'll highlight that one for now. Is there a is there a value in fitting into one particular box in hashkafa? Depends who designed the box. Is there a value in someone supporting himself financially if he's totally taken care of? So it it depends what the what the alternative is to his his being self-supporting. If a person has a relative, a friend, someone who's, you know, ready, willing, and and able and and wants to support on the one hand. On the other hand, by accepting the support, so this person is able to genuinely devote himself to teaching, to habotzas Torah. And he's accomplishing, as long as the Rambam's brother was alive, so the Rambam allowed his brother to support him. If it's something which the person supporting, it's really a crushing load. It's a crushing load on the father-in-law, but he had to commit himself to it because otherwise he couldn't have married off his daughter. If it's that a person chas veshalom thinks that there's a sense of entitlement, if he's not being especially productive and doesn't feel a sense of achrayus in accepting support, so then it's not such a healthy arrangement. You know, the sort of starting point for the deliberation is that a person has a responsibility to make hishtadlus for parnassa. That's the starting point for the deliberation, that a person has such a responsibility. Let's say he is someone who can make a very real contribution in chinuch, but in the short term, he doesn't see how he's going to be able to pay the bills and his parents or his in-laws have the resource and they want to partner with him in that, so that's beautiful. That's something very beautiful and it's very appropriate to accept the help. Now, whether or not societally things should be structured that way is a different story. But so it depends, you know, why the person is taking the support and what he's doing with it and what his attitude towards it is vechulu. Do we have time for another question? One more minute. How does the Rosh Yeshiva see the role of a Rebbi and what factors should one put into choosing one? A Rebbi should teach you content of Torah, how to learn Torah, and how to live Torah. That's all, but don't do anything else. So mainly you sort of look to see where you're going to get those things. Thank you, Rav.