1993 Hesped for Rav zt”l

The Rav Zichrono Livracha was inseparable from Divrei Torah. Chazal comment on the Pasuk at the beginning of Sefer Tehillim Ve'alehu lo yibol,

אפילו הפסולת שבו לצורך היא, שיחתן של תלמידי חכמים לצורך היא וצריכה לימוד.

Even the casual conversation of Talmidei Chachamim is for some need of Torah and therefore needs to be studied and understood the way any passage of Torah does. Both in word and in deed, Talmidei Chachamim reflect the Torah concepts which they have internalized. Thus, integrating Divrei Torah with Divrei Zikaron is not merely a rhetorical ploy or device; it is only against the background of Divrei Torah that these Divrei Zikaron can be properly understood and assessed. Following the Petira of Rav Chaim Ozer, the universally recognized Gadol Umanhig Hador, the Agudath HaRabbonim of America organized a Hesped. They invited the Rav Zichrono Livracha to deliver the eulogy. When Rabbi Eliezer Silver introduced the Rav, he cited the Gemara in Kesubos Kuf Gimmel that at the time of his death, Rebbe left a Tzava'ah Al taspeduni ba'ayaros. Literally, don't eulogize me in small cities. Rabbi Eliezer Silver explained that Rebbe's intent was זיי מיר נישט מספיד ווי א קליין שטעטלדיקע ייד. Don't eulogize me in a provincial, petty, small-minded way. To ensure a proper Hesped for Rav Chaim Ozer, Rabbi Eliezer Silver concluded, we had to turn to the Rav. Similarly, in speaking about the Rav Zichrono Livracha, we should not violate Rebbe's instructions. Recalling incidents and anecdotes, employing stale superlatives will not suffice. We must uncover the Torah concepts and the magisterial Torah personality that underlie them. And in mourning the Rav Zichrono Livracha, we mourn for Torah. The Gemara in Sanhedrin Samech Ches relates that upon the Petira of Rabbi Eliezer, רבי עקיבא היה מכה בבשרו עד שדמו שותת לארץ. He was hitting himself, he was engaging in self-flagellation until his blood was flowing. Tosafos asks: isn't this against an explicit Lo Sa'aseh in the Torah of ושרט לנפש לא תתנו בבשרכם? Rashi explains in the Peirush al haTorah

כן דרכן של אמוראים להיות משרטין בבשרם כשמת להם מת,

and Tosafos answer that ומשום שרט לנפש ליכא דמשום תורה קעביד. He wasn't just grieving for a personal loss; he was grieving for the loss of Torah, כדיאמר הרבה מעות יש לי ואין לי שולחני להרצותן. It is the same concept that determines that Chacham befanav overrides Issur Hesped in Chol Hamoed. Similarly though the Gemara in Sanhedrin Mem Zayin concludes that Hesped is Ikra Deshichva and hence a person can instruct, he can leave a Tzava'ah that he not be eulogized, the Noda Biyehuda paskened that in the case of a Gadol Hador, his wishes are not honored and a Hesped is delivered. And indeed the Noda Biyehuda eulogized the Pnei Yehoshua against the explicit provisions of his Tzava'ah. And again, although it's a Halacha Pesuka in Yoreh Deah that

מי שמת לו מת לפני ל' יום הסמוכים לרגל לא יספדנו משיכנסו ל' יום הסמוכים לרגל,

that if the Petira occurred more than thirty days before the Yom Tov, no Hespedim should be said within thirty days of the Yom Tov, nevertheless the Gilyon Maharsha and Pischa Teshuva quote that in the case of a Talmid Chacham Vega'on, the Din is not applicable. All these halachos reflect that in reminiscing about a gadol, certainly the gadol we are teaching, hespeid is eliminated or curtailed under certain conditions. But divrei Torah and divrei hisorerus cannot be curtailed. As we mourn the Rav zichrono livracha, we mourn the dramatic diminution of Torah. Hashem yeracheim. At the siyum Monday, a brief attempt, albeit inadequate, was made to portray something of the Rav's unique greatness in Torah. His personification of the midda of Torah chasuymu v'nisnu. Bein hayeser, an excerpt from the Rav's penetrating portrayal of the sar ha-Torah who was wed and totally bound to the Torah was read. I ask your indulgence just to repeat a few lines and to continue from there. איש ההלכה שהתורה נישאת לו, the ish ha-halacha par excellence who was wed to the Torah, v'davka bah, and he clings to Torah and Torah clings to him, ro'eh tchanim hilchiyim, margish yedios hilchiyos, he sees, he senses halachic ideas כאילו היו תכני כל מראה וריח as though they were tangible. הוא חי לא רק בהלכה כי אם את ההלכה, he lives it. בשלב זה, Torah nisgalais la-adam, Torah is revealed to a person לא רק בבחינת בינה, hamisamenes, which signifies es ha-sichliyus ha-shaanana, the fresh intellectual grasp, hamivarems v'hamivakeres, which clarifies and critiques, כי אם גם דרך צינורותיה של ספירת החכמה, but also through the channels of the sefiras hachochma, שממנה שוטפת האינטואיציה הגאונית היוצרת to a creative intuition. And the Rav goes on to describe it at great length, this almost mystical intuition, this sefiras hachochma which that rare gadol achieves. Though the Rav zichrono livracha emphasizes Rav Chaim's singularity in the respect of Torah intuition, to some degree every chacham mechachmei hamasora possesses it. Perhaps not equally, but all chachmei hamasora certainly possess a measure of it. In fact, these are the two characteristic features of the chachmei hamasora: mastery of all areas of Torah and a special chush, a special intuitive sense for the intent and meaning of the masora. Against this background, we can understand a central and critical component of masora, and only through an understanding of masora and the role of the chachmei hamasora will we have the perspective which is indispensable to understand the Rav zichrono livracha, some of his halachic decisions and hashkafic positions. Consider, if you will, the following famous passage from the Chazon Ish in יורה דעה סימן ב regarding the halacha of moridin v'ein maalin. The Gemara provides that in the case of certain heretics, kofrim, apikorsim, so the din is that not only would we not save them, rescue them from a pit, but we would even induce their fall. Chazon Ish comments as follows. ונראה דאין דין מורידין אלא בזמן שהשגחתו יתברך גלויה. This din only applies when divine providence is glaringly evident. כמו בזמן שהיו נסים מצויים, when miracles, open miracles were very common, u'mshamesh bas kol, and we had the ben- A very plain and obvious personal divine providence. והכופר אז הוא בהטיית היצר לתאוות והפקרות. Under those circumstances, under those conditions, any kofer, any non-believers, it was a conscious attempt to incline themselves to hedonism, towards anarchy. ואז היו ביעור רשעים גדרו של עולם. Then, destroying resha'im was the preservation of the world, שהכל ידעו כי הדחת הדור מביא פורענות לעולם because were they to lead the generation astray it would bring catastrophe to the world ומביא דבר וחרב ורעב לעולם, plague and war and famine. אבל בזמן ההעלם שנכרתה האמונה מדלת העם in our time, when belief in Hashem is not as strong or as widespread as it once was, אין במעשה הרדה גדר הפרצה. To act on the din of moridin ve-ein ma'alin would not strengthen Torah, ela hosofas ha-pirtza, but would further undermine Torah. שיהיה ביניהם כמעשה השחתה ואלמות חס ושלום, it would appear as an act of destruction and violence. וכיון שכל עצמנו לתקן, since our intent, the thrust, is to be constructive, אין הדין נוהג בשעה שאין בו תיקון. The din is not operative when it doesn't impact constructively. And on the contrary, ועלינו להחזירם בעבותות של אהבה. We should try to entice them back to Torah through love ולהעמידם בקרן אורה במשך ידינו מגעת and expose them to the light of Torah. What a remarkable and revolutionary psak of the Chazon Ish. Without any proofs, the basis of the Chazon Ish's psak is ve-nira. Ve-nira. It was this Torah intuition which the Rav described in this case of the Chazon Ish, rooted in the spirit of Chochma, which guided him in establishing the parameters of moridin ve-ein ma'alin. The Torah itself dictates that in some cases the application and implementation of certain dinim varies לפי המקום והזמן, according to time and place. Kefira is no less repugnant or shamefully false, yet it was the Chazon Ish and it was his Torah intuition, culled from his mastery of kol ha-Torah kullah that enabled him to recognize that this was dictated by the mesorah itself. The treatment of kof'rim varies. Another example: the Bais Yaakov movement initially encountered vigorous adamant resistance, u-le-shem shamayim. It was a radical departure from מנהג ישראל סבא המוחזק לנו מדורות קדמונים. And yet, with the support of the Chofetz Chaim and other manhigei ha-dor, it prevailed. The same approach of the Chofetz Chaim was reflected in his famous comment in the Likkutei Halachos on the Mishna in Sotah of כל המלמד בתו תורה כאילו מלמדה תפלות. The Chofetz Chaim writes in that famous passage ve-nira. It would appear דכל זה דוקא בזמנים שלפנינו. The Chofetz Chaim has previously explained that even Torah she-bi-ksav, le-chatchila one is not supposed to teach. Be-di'eved it's not k'ilu melamda tiflus, but le-chatchila it's also frowned upon. Then the Chofetz Chaim comments:

ונראה דכל זה דוקא בזמנים שלפנינו שכל אחד היה דר במקום אבותיו וקבלת האבות היה חזק מאד.

People lived in the same town as their parents, and their personal tradition was very strong.

קבלת האבות היה חזק מאד אצל כל אחד ואחד להתנהג בדרך שדרכו אבותיו וכמאמר הכתוב שאל אביך ויגדך. בזה היינו יכולים לומר

then we had the luxury to say שלא תלמד תורה ותסמוך בהנהגה על אבותיה הישרים she needn't learn Torah, she can rely on her behavior in what she'll learn from her righteous ancestors. אבל כעת בעוונותינו הרבים but currently, שקבלה אבותינו נחלשה מאוד מאוד the tradition has become very weakened. vegam matzuy it's very common שאין הבנים דרים במקום אבותיהם כלל. Children often, as they grow up, don't dwell in the same town as their parents, u-ve-frat especially אותן שמרגילים עצמן ללמוד כתב ולשון העמים the women who have become literate in the language of their country. be-vadai mitzvah rabbah it's certainly a great mitzvah lelamdam Chumash to teach them Chumash, vegam Nevi’im u-Kesuvim to instruct them in Nach, u-musrei Chazal, kigon Masechet Avos and Sefer Menorat HaMaor ve-chadomeh in order that שיתאמת אצלם עניין אמונתנו הקדושה that they should understand the truth of our beliefs. de-ilmaleh hachi, if not for this instruction that we will give them, alulim they are prone שיסורו לגמרי מדרך השם to stray from the way Hashem ויעברו על כל יסודי הדת and to transgress the principles of Yiddishkeit, chas v’shalom. End quote. When this passage is juxtaposed with the passage from the Chazon Ish, one striking resemblance can be noted. Neither quotes supplementary sources or adduces any proofs. In each case, it is the intuitive understanding of the Chachmei HaMasorah of what the parameters of the masorah are. We can now comprehend and appreciate a halakha in the Rambam Hilchos Teshuvah Perek Gimmel Halakha Ches. The Rambam writes שלושה הן הכופרים בתורה. There are three types of people who are considered to be denying Torah. האומר שאין תורה מעם השם one who denies that even the Torah Shebiktav, the written Torah, comes from Hashem אפילו פסוק אחד אפילו תיבה אחת even one letter. אם אמר משה אמרו מפי עצמו if he says Moshe Rabbeinu said it on his own, הרי זה כופר בתורה. Number two.

וכן הכופר בפירושה והוא תורה שבעל פה והמכחיש מגידיה כגון צדוק ובייתוס

one who denies Torah Sheba'al Peh. Number three.

והאומר שהבורא החליף מצוה זו במצוה אחרת וכבר בטלה תורה זו.

Number three, one who says that the mitzvos of Torah are not eternal. כל אחד משלושה אלו כופר בתורה. If you look carefully at the second class of kofrim, so the Rambam writes הכופר בפירושה והוא תורה שבעל פה והמכחיש מגידיה. Not only does one become a kofer, is one labeled as a kofer for denying Torah Sheba'al Peh, but for quote machshish, for contradicting the חכמי תורה שבעל פה, the Chachmei HaMasorah. The Rav zichrono livracha used to quote this he'ara from his father. The reason is clear now. The Chachmei HaMasorah are not merely human tape recorders for transmitting masorah. Their understanding and interpretation are an integral part of the masorah. Hence there is no distinction and there can be no distinction between Torah Sheba'al Peh and מגידי תורה שבעל פה and the Chachmei HaMasorah who transmit Torah Sheba'al Peh. All Chachmei HaMasorah realize this. Not to be maarich, one or two further examples will have to suffice. The Gemara in Berachos recounts that

כשחלה רבי אליעזר נכנסו תלמידיו לבקרו. אמרו לו רבנו למדנו אורחות חיים ונזכה בהם לחיי העולם הבא. אמר להם הזהרו בכבוד חבריכם ומנעו בניכם מן ההיגיון והושיבום בין ברכי תלמידי חכמים וכשאתם מתפללים דעו לפני מי אתם עומדים ובשביל כך תזכו לחיי העולם הבא.

What is ומנעו בניכם מן ההיגיון? Hold back, detain your children from higayon. Rashi explains that higayon refers to Tanach, to Mikra. And Rabbi Eliezer instructed that לא תרגילום במקרא יותר מדי משום דמשכא. They shouldn't spend too much time on Torah shebiksav. They shouldn't be overly preoccupied with Torah shebiksav. The main thrust of their learning has to be Torah sheba'al peh. Nevertheless, the Malbim abandoned other projects such as his peirush on Shulchan Aruch, Artzos Hachayim, and devoted his life to composing a commentary on Tanach. Moreover, he preoccupied himself with the discipline of dikduk, a favorite and trademark of contemporary maskilim. To get a sense of how this discipline was associated exclusively with maskilim, so later it's told of the Chofetz Chaim that he was once asked why he doesn't instruct his talmidim in dikduk. After all, the Gemara in Brachos says that korei v'lo dikdek, so you're only yatza Kriyas Shema bedi'eved. And if korei v'dikdek, so the Gemara says there's tremendous schar attached to that, tremendous schar forthcoming. So the Chofetz Chaim is reported to have answered, korei v'lo dikdek is at least yatza bedi'eved, but dikdek v'lo korei is not yatza at all. So from the Chofetz Chaim's response, you get a sense for what still in his days, the Malbim was earlier, what the preoccupation with the discipline of dikduk seemed to imply about a person. The Malbim was misunderstood, subsequently maligned and persecuted. In Poland they used to take the peirush of the Malbim, so we today we know who the Malbim was. We know the Rav used to quote from Reb Chaim, that Reb Chaim used to say that in his father's generation, in the previous generation, there were four people who resembled the Rishonim. There was Reb Yisrael Salanter, there was רב יהושע לייב דיסקין, there was his father the Beis Halevi, and there was the Malbim. And the Rav also used to tell how once the Beis Halevi instructed his young daughter and told her quick, put on your Shabbos dress and take candles. So she asked him where are we going? So he said the Malbim is passing through town. We're going to greet the Gadol Hador. So we know today who the Malbim was, but his contemporaries didn't, and even after his ptira they didn't. They used to take this peirush of the Malbim and they used to throw it on the floor and they used to walk on it. כך שמעתי מפי עדי ראייה. In fact, the Malbim understood the basic and crucial theme of our Masora. Chachmei Hamasora must be guided by their understanding of Masora and implement it accordingly lefi hamakom vehazeman. Examples throughout bemeshech kol hadoros. When Reb Chaim Volozhiner founded the Volozhin Yeshiva, it was a revolutionary, revolutionary notion. Rav Aaron Soloveitchik always tells that when challenged why he felt there was a need to upset what had been the norm until then, that in every every shtetl had a local beis medrash and people went and they sat and learned, why did all of a sudden Reb Chaim Volozhiner feel that there was need to change things? So Reb Chaim Volozhiner said Shas lo lamdu and most of Shas they'll understand, however... Some Gemaras they won't understand. When asked which Gemaras they won't understand, so Rav Chaim Volozhiner referred to the Gemara that am ha'aretz muttar or mitzvah l'nochro k'dag. Why did Rav Chaim Volozhiner ad kan dvarov? Why did Rav Chaim Volozhiner quote that Gemara? S'felt nisht kein shvere Rambams. After all, this was before Rav Chaim. We didn't have Rav Chaim's sefer on the Rambam yet. There were a lot of shvere Gemaras that we needed Volozhin to explain. Why did Rav Chaim Volozhiner pick this Gemara? Kimdimani Rav Chaim Volozhiner chose this Gemara, a shvere Rambam, okay. This Gemara needed more than just a brilliant shiur to understand. This Gemara you needed a sense for understanding masora, to get inside masora, to understand the intent of masora, the parameters of masora, and how masora is to be applied. For that Rav Chaim Volozhiner felt you needed a kibbutz goliyos. You needed a major center of Torah where talmidim from all over could be exposed to the gedolei hador. Positions adopted by the gedolei hador and chachmei hamasora throughout the generations in accordance with this fundamental principle are easily misunderstood and distorted. Modernist, reformist, and the like are among the labels wrongly attached and the charges falsely filed. It's easy to avoid the stress and the strain of being subject to slanderous distortions. One can abstain from adopting positions which are easily distorted. But to do so would compromise emes. The Rav zichrono livracha never compromised middas ha'emes. His courageous applications and understanding of the masora were severely misunderstood and dangerously distorted. But he never backed away from emes regardless of the personal consequences. He was guided by the Gemara in Avodah Zarah and Sotah:

כי רבים חללים הפילה ועצומים כל הרוגיה. כי רבים חללים הפילה זה תלמיד חכם שלא הגיע להוראה ומורה. ועצומים כל הרוגיה זה תלמיד חכם שהגיע להוראה ואינו מורה.

Someone who is unqualified, not mechachmei hamasora, dare not act on or instruct others based on his grasp of masora. But someone who is qualified, who is from the outstanding chachmei hamasora, dare not refrain. With this in mind, listen to the account as translated into Hebrew which the Rav zichrono livracha provided of his joining Mizrachi. As an aside, my intention here, if you agree with what you're about to hear, is not to reinforce your beliefs and if you disagree it's not to challenge your beliefs. I would be gratified though if a proper understanding of the Rav's hashkafos emerged. אינני רוצה לדבר על אחרים. This is a Hebrew translation of the Yiddish original. מוטב שאדבר על עצמי. לא נולדתי בבית ציוני. I wasn't born into a Mizrachi house. I wasn't born into a Zionist oriented house. בית אבא שלי רבותי היו רחוקים מהמזרחי. Hasharashim sheli, my roots, magi'im amok amok, very deep, beTorah sheba'al peh, belamdanus. כל השקפת העולם שלי, my entire world outlook, nisgabsha, was crystallized באווירה של רמב"ם וראב"ד, shel shibuda de'oraisa, yusham hashra, yuchlat hashra,

ומי גילה פתחי משבועה. אמנם בביתי מילאה ארץ ישראל תפקיד גדול.

Eretz Yisrael filled an important function.

רב חיים היה הראשון שניתח באורח הלכתי, הגדיר וניסח ברמת מחשבה גבוהה את המושגים קדושת הארץ קדושת מחיצות קידשה לשעתה וקידשה לעתיד לבוא ביאת כולכם כל יושביה יש קניין לנכרי וכן הלאה.

Reb Chaim was the first to say Torah on these.

המונחים יצקו לא רק מושגים מחשבה מופשטת וחידוש פורמלי אלא רגשות עמוקי שורשים אהבה געגועים וחזון.

When Reb Chaim dealt with these inyanim, he didn't do so in an abstract fashion, but with total involvement, involvement with yearning and with love for Eretz Yisrael.

רב חיים היה אולי חובב ציון הגדול ביותר שחי בדור ההוא.

Reb Chaim was the greatest ohev Eretz Yisrael of his generation. tamid hishta'ashea bara'ayon, he was enchanted with the idea,

כי לאחר שישיא את ילדיו ימסור את הרבנות לאחד מבניו ובעצמו ישתקע בארץ ישראל.

He would go live in Eretz Yisrael, יקנה פרדס ויקיים מצוות התלויות בארץ. He'd become a farmer to be

מקיים מצוות התלויות בארץ. אהבת ציון וחיבת ירושלים של רב חיים מבריסק אין לה כל שייכות לציונות של חיים וייצמן כפי שהיא באה לידי ביטוי בספרו מסה ומעש. להיפך היא נמצאת בסתירה גמורה איתו. אם סבורים אתם כי קל לי להסתגל לצוואה החצי אפיקורסית של חיים וייצמן בפרק האחרון של ספרו אינכם אלא טועים.

If you think I'm comfortable with secular versions of Zionism, you are gravely mistaken. אם אני מזדהה כעת עם המזרחי, if I currently do identify with the Mizrachi, אין זה אלא שאני מרגיש כי ההשגחה פסקה כמותם. I feel in light of recent history that Mizrachi in our time, in our tekufah, is the correct approach. The Rav zichrono livracha boldly applied the masorah he received in pre-World War II Eastern Europe in the post-war America and Eretz Yisrael. He was not a modernist. His religious views were shaped as he received the glorious masorah of Brisk and Volozhin in his youth. His sense of overwhelming responsibility to that masorah, to the chachmei hamasorah of his own family can be gleaned from the following comment. The Rav once said, and as you listen to this please keep in mind the insistence which Brisk had on precision: I would give my right arm to be able to discuss with my father for a mere 15 minutes some of the serious shailos, pikuach nefesh and such, which come my way. Not a person to abandon the mesorah, but a person to intuit how that mesorah, what that mesorah dictates in his age and in his day. In denouncing the trend toward modernization rachmana litzlan of Yiddishkeit, the Rav zichrono livracha wrote: The context of this letter is a letter where he repeated his psak that it's absolutely forbidden to go into a shul without a mechitzah, even if there's no other way of hearing shofar on Rosh Hashanah, even if there's no other way of tefillah betzibbur on Rosh Hashanah, absolutely forbidden. And then after issuing this psak, after labeling a shul without a mechitzah as a Christianized synagogue, so the Rav wrote: I know beforehand the reaction to my letter on the part of our apostles of religious modernism in quotation marks and utilitarianism in quotation marks. They will certainly say that since a great majority of the recently constructed synagogues have abandoned separate seating, we must not be out of step with the masses. We should be modern. This type of reasoning, continues the Rav, could well be employed with regard to other religious precepts, such as the observance of Shabbos or the dietary laws. However, we must remember that an ethical or halakhic principle decreed by God is not rendered void by the fact that people refuse to abide by it. Its cogency and veracity are perennial and independent of compliance on the part of the multitudes. If the ethical norm thou shalt not kill, lo tirtzach, has not lost its validity during the days of extermination camps and gas chambers when millions of people were engaged in ruthless murder, but on the contrary has been impregnated with deeper meaning and significance, then every halakhic maxim assumes greater import in times of widespread disregard and unconcern. The greater the difficulty, the more biting the ridicule and sarcasm, and the more numerous the opponent, then the holier is the principle and the more sacred is our duty to defend it. Or in other words, if we live in modern times, so the response, and the Rav's response, was not to become more modern, but to become more traditional. In my opinion, the Rav continues, the halakhic dictum

בשעת גזירת המלכות אפילו מצווה קלה כגון לשנויי ערקסא דמסאנא יהרג ואל יעבור,

at a time of religious persecution through governmental decree, even for a minor custom such as one involving changing a shoelace, let one suffer death sooner than transgress it, requiring of us a heroic stand in times of adversity, applies not only to political and religious persecution originated by some pagan ruler, but also to situations in which a number of God-fearing and Torah-loyal people, a small number of God-fearing and Torah-loyal people, is confronted with a hostile attitude on the part of the majority dominated by a false philosophy. The Rav zichrono livracha was not a modernist nor was he the leader of modern orthodoxy. He didn't embrace Mizrachi or any other cause because he was modern, because of its modernity. In the case of Mizrachi, which I cite only as an example, his approach was based on Torah considerations, amongst others on the Ramban's formulation in Sefer HaMitzvos, she-nitzvinu lareshes ha'aretz, and the Rav himself would quote this,

שנתצוינו לרשת הארץ אשר נתן הא-ל יתעלה לאבותינו לאברהם ליצחק וליעקב ולא נעזבה ביד זולתנו מן האומות או לשממה.

So Jewish autonomy, Jewish statehood, is... wasn't something which had modern appeal to the Rav, but he felt it was mandated by the Torah. And if secular statehood is an aberration which the Rav zichrono livracha always decried, it was still undeniably a partial fulfillment of that mitzvah. Here, to digress for one moment, I think the Rambam has in the Hakdama to one of his works, he lists reasons, possible sources for why people find contradictions. One of the sources of confusion and misunderstanding of many of the Rav's public positions and public hanhagos. Number one, many of his positions were subtle. And if שיחת חולין של תלמידי חכמים צריכה תלמוד, certainly public positions which they espoused and adopted tzricha talmud. Moreover, and this excerpt which we read from the Mizrachi drasha illustrates it very well, the Rav's attraction to Mizrachi, the Rav's support for Mizrachi was not necessarily the same as those of others. And their statements and their credos about Mizrachi didn't necessarily reflect what his credo was. And in attempting to understand the Rav, what he stood for, it's crucial not to introduce anyone else's understanding or perception of Mizrachi, anyone else's description of called religious nationalism, but the Rav's. In his applications and implementations, his views were not necessarily those of the majority, but the principles of masorah were the same. He brilliantly and heroically guided Klal Yisrael under modern conditions in the same glorious tradition of the Chazon Ish's b'neira of Moridin v'Ein Ma'alin, the Chofetz Chaim's b'neira in Likkutei Halachos with reference to Talmud Torah b'nashim, and in fact all Chachmei haMasorah. Another quality which we associate with emes, with truth, is exclusivity. This is the truth to the exclusion of all else. But this perception is incomplete. The Gemara in Eruvin with which we're all familiar tells us that a bas kol emerged min hashamayim to resolve the standoff between Beis Hillel and Beis Shammai and declared that אלו ואלו דברי אלוקים חיים והלכה כדברי בית הלל. Here we have it unambiguously. There is room under the banner of truth, under the banner of Da'as Torah, for legitimate disagreement between Chachmei haTorah. Having mastered the entire corpus of Torah she-biksav and Torah she-ba'al peh, two Chachmei haTorah may come to differing, conceptually and practically contradictory, but equally valid and Torah true opinions, in halacha and in hashkafa. This principle, this paradoxical principle, can best be illustrated by considering a Rashi in Parshas Mishpatim:

אם שכיר הוא אם השור אינו שאול אלא שכיר בא בשכרו ליד השוכר הזה ולא בשאילה ואין כל הנאה שלו שהרי על ידי שכר נשתמש ואינו משפט שואל להתחייב באונס. ולא פירש מה דינו.

The Torah doesn't say what the din of a sochir is. It specifies the din of the other gimel shomrim, it doesn't specify the din of the sochir, אם כשומר חינם או כשומר שכר. L'fichach, says Rashi, therefore נחלקו בו חכמי ישראל. Therefore the Chachmei Yisrael... had a dispute about this point.

רבי מאיר אומר כשומר חנם, רבי יהודה אומר כשומר שכר.

The Torah intentionally conspicuously does not dictate the din of the socheir as it does with the other gimmel shomrim. Hakadosh Baruch Hu wanted and Rav Chaim Volozhiner explains this and dwells upon this at great length in Nefesh Hachayim and other sources as well. Talmud Torah—Hakadosh Baruch Hu wanted the Talmud Torah to be a creative undertaking. It's not just an exercise in memory. It is the task of the Chachmei Yisrael, having mastered the entire corpus of Torah Shebichtav and Torah Sheba'al Peh, employing מידות שהתורה נדרשת בהן to extrapolate and determine the din in those areas where the Torah was intentionally silent. Dissect, analyze, understand the principles of gimmel shomrim whose halachos are stated explicitly in the Torah and determine the din of the socheir. That is the charge of the Torah to the Chachmei Yisrael, Chachmei Hamasorah. This process of dissection and analysis, extrapolation and comparison may produce two divergent but equally valid Torat emet opinions. This is true in the realm of halacha and hashkafa. We're ready, even eager, to embrace the principle of אלו ואלו דברי אלוהים חיים when studying a machlokes Abaye v'Rava, Rambam and Ra'avad, Shach and Taz. But when we are party to a contemporary machlokes on contemporary halachic or hashkafic issues, it becomes increasingly difficult to concede this principle. מעשה שהיה כך היה. Someone came to the הרב זכר צדיק לברכה with a very serious shaila. And as sometimes happens, the petitioner didn't just present the shaila, but the petitioner had a certain response in mind. A heter was sought. After deliberating, the הרב זכר צדיק לברכה responded, 'I have no heter for you. But there are other rabbonim. You're not bound by my word, you may consult others.' The הרב זכר צדיק לברכה did not only learn a daf Gemara based on the principle of elu v'elu, he lived that way as well. Another maaseh shehayah. In the 1950s, רב אהרן קוטלר זכר צדיק לברכה was guest of honor at the Chinuch Atzmai dinner. He personally asked the Rav to serve as honorary dinner chairman and invited the Rav to deliver the keynote address. Listen again to a brief excerpt in translation of the Rav's own words on that occasion: 'I am most proud this evening. First, because many active members of Mizrachi are present.' Again, this was a Chinuch Atzmai dinner. 'It is a sign it can rise above narrow political thinking. I am proud to see members and leaders of the Histadrut Harabbonim. I am also proud that sitting at the dais I see my own baaleibatim from the Moriah shul. But despite the fact that 75 to 80 percent of this shul is officially bound to Mizrachi ideology, their presence here this evening is testament that Jews can rise above all political ideologies and extend their hand when it comes to Torah. And I am especially proud that I myself came, though I strongly fear that the yetzer hara would subvert my intentions.' To live in accordance of eilu v'eilu. To learn in accordance of eilu v'eilu is a source of endless excitement and challenge. To live in accordance of eilu v'eilu requires constant sacrifice and mesirus nefesh. But when you see someone who does live that way, it's a siman muvhak of a genuine authentic ish emes. And v'ha'emes v'hashalom ohavu וראיתי אנשי אמת והמה מועטים. In his masterful hesped for Reb Velvele, the Rav touches upon Reb Velvele's attitude toward the Medina. He characterized it as one of negation. Not so much one of opposition as one of negation. Reb Velvele felt it had no halachic validity. It had no halachic standing. The story is told, the Rav doesn't tell it here, the story is told elsewhere. Reb Velvele used to say his shiur at a certain hour every day. And then they introduced daylight savings time. So everyone arrived for the shiur the next day on the new clock. And they're sitting and they're waiting and they're sitting and they're waiting. Finally an hour passes, to the minute, to the second, and Reb Velvele walks in. It's time for the shiur. It didn't exist. It had no halachic validity to the mind of this ish halacha. It didn't exist. The Rav makes the most eloquent, persuasive and powerful presentation of his uncle's views. Never once even hinting at his own disagreement. I know of no more persuasive presentation of this position and all of this from the pen of someone who identified with Mizrachi. The Rav Zichrono Livracha was an ish emes.

נוח ועלוב שונה דבריו ודברי חברו ולא עוד אלא שהיה מקדים דבריהם לדבריו.

But even more is demanded of us. Eilu v'eilu doesn't exhaust it. The Midrash in Bereishis Rabbah quoted by the Rav Zichrono Livracha in his hesped for Reb Velvele teaches: Amar Rabbi Simon

בשעה שבא הקדוש ברוך הוא לבראות את העולם לבראות את אדם הראשון כשבא הקדוש ברוך הוא לבראות את אדם הראשון נעשו מלאכי השרת כיתים כיתים וחבורות חבורות

sects, different v'chavuros chavuros and different groups emerged amongst the malachei hashareis. מהם אומרים אל יברא ומהם אומרים יברא. Some argued against his creation, some advocated his creation.

הדא הוא דכתיב חסד ואמת נפגשו צדק ושלום נשקו. חסד אומר יברא שהוא גומל חסדים. אמת אומר אל יברא שכולו דובר שקרים. צדק אומר יברא שהוא עושה צדקות. שלום אומר אל יברא דכוליה קטטה.

The Rav in the name of his father explains that emes and shalom opposed berias ha'adam, creation of Adam HaRishon, because they realized that at least one of them would be compromised if not outright sacrificed. כשם שפרצופיהם שונים כן דעותיהם שונות. And in order to bridge the gap and make peace between those de'os shonos, people will compromise emes. And if they don't compromise emes, if they zealously defend emes, then shalom will be the casualty. עד כאן דברי הרב. But the end of the midrash remains perplexing. The midrash continues:

מה עשה הקדוש ברוך הוא נטל אמת והשליכו לארץ הדא הוא דכתיב ותשלך אמת ארצה.

Amru malachei hashareis... Hakadosh Baruch Hu to resolve the conflict between Emet and Shalom cast Emet down to the earth. But then when the Malachei Hasharet objected he seemingly recanted. How then was the conflict between Shalom and Emet resolved that enabled the creation of Adam Harishon? And in fact we are commanded we're metzuveh to cultivate both middot. The Yud Gimmel Middot of Hakadosh Baruch Hu which the mitzvah of Vehallachta Bidrachav commands us to emulate contain the mida of Emet. Thus it is a mitzvas asei d'Oraisa to be totally and absolutely truthful as explained by Rabbeinu Yonah in Pirkei Avos. It's mandated by Vehallachta Bidrachav because Emet is memiddosav of Hakadosh Baruch Hu. And yet me'idach לא יהא כקורח וכעדתו. Shalom must reign. Hayitachen? The Gemara in Ta'anis records

אמר רב נחמן בר יצחק אף אני אומר לא הכל לאורה ולא הכל לשמחה.

Orah light is not reserved for all, Simchah joy is not reserved for all. צדיקים לאורה וישרים לשמחה. Tzaddikim la'orah dichtiv Or zarua latzaddik and yisharim la'simchah dichtiv ulishrei lev simchah. Rashi explains ישרים לשמחה דישרים עדיפי מצדיקים. Yisharim are greater than tzaddikim. Who are the yisharim that they surpass even tzaddikim? The Netziv in his famous comment in the hakdamah to his peirush in Sefer Bereishis explains.

ספר בראשית נקרא בפי הנביאים ספר הישר כדאיתא במסכת עבודת כוכבים על שני מקראות בספר יהושע הלא היא כתובה על ספר הישר ומפורש רבי יוחנן זה ספר אברהם יצחק ויעקב שנקראו ישרים דהאבות קרויים ישרים שנאמר תמות נפשי מות ישרים. ויש להבין הטעם למה קרא בלעם את אבותינו בשם ישרים ביחוד ולא צדיקים וחסידים וכדומה. פירשנו שהיו בזמן בית שני צדיקים וחסידים ועמלי תורה אך לא היו ישרים בהליכות עולמים. על כן מפני שנאת חינם שבלבם זה לזה

one for another, the sinas chinam which they harbored one for another,

חשדו את מי שראו שנוהג שלא כדעתם ביראת השם שהוא

Tzadoki and apikorus. Someone who acted differently in expressing yiras Hashem was suspect to be an apikorus. ועל זה היה tziduk hadin שהקדוש ברוך הוא ישר הוא ואינו סובל צדיקים כאלו. Hakadosh Baruch Hu does not tolerate this.

אף על גב שהוא לשם שמים. וזה היה שבח האבות.

This was the great tribute to the avos,

שמלבד שהיו צדיקים וחסידים ואוהבי השם באופן היותר אפשר עוד היו ישרים.

Hainu that means שהתנהגו עם umos ha'olam even with the nations of the world אפילו עובדי אלילים מכוערים. Idolaters.

מכל מקום היו עמם באהבה וחששו לטובתם באשר היא קיום הבריאה. כמו שאנו רואים כמה השתטח

Avraham Avinu להתפלל על סדום. How much Avraham Avinu exerted himself to intercede on behalf of anshei Sdom.

אף על גב שהיה שונא אותם ואת מלכם תכלית השנאה עבור רשעותם.

Even though he hated them the most passionate hatred possible because of their wickedness. And the Netziv continues. Yashrus demands not only that we respect legitimate disagreement but that we show profound concern for those whose views are illegitimate, even abhorrent, condemned. Condemnation of evil coupled with concern for those who perpetrate evil, Yashrus demands this combination. Now we can locate the kosov hashlishi to mediate between the competing claims of shalom and emes. In Sefer Koheles אלקים עשה את האדם ישר והמה בקשו חשבונות רבים. Hakadosh baruch hu, to a degree that it's possible for humans to implement, resolve the dispute so beautifully depicted by the Rav between shalom and emes by giving Adam a capacity for Yashrus. Yashrus allows Adam to maintain his integrity, stand on principle, uphold tenaciously and fight for emes and at the same time retain shalom. מעשה שהיה כך היה. A prominent member of Neturei Karta would visit the Rav zecher tzadik livracha in Boston annually. The Rav always contributed very generously. The solicitor would then either take the original or photostat the check, I'm not sure about that detail, and he would approach certain prominent balebattim in the kehilla and argue rather cogently that if the Rav contributes so generously you must act in kind. The balebattim were incredulous. The Rav contributes and so generously to Neturei Karta? Simply unfathomable. So two balebattim separately on different occasions put the question to the Rav. How does the Rav support Neturei Karta? Or if they would have said it less diplomatically, which they didn't, you support them? They continued, if the Rav were to visit Eretz Yisroel they would be the first to picket. On one occasion the Rav answered bivdichusa and on one occasion he answered seriously. Once he responded, I was assured that my money would not be used for the pickets. On the other occasion he responded, I don't understand the question. They put on tallis and they lay tefillin just like I do. They deserve my support. I don't understand the question. The Rav zecher tzadik livracha was a kannoi for emes, he was a kannoi for Yashrus. Yashrus characterized and defined the Rav's approach to secularism and secular Jews and gentiles as well. He did not compromise an iota. Remember that excerpt we read from the letter regarding entering a shul without a mechitzah? He denounced it in extreme terms. He banned eloquently but very forcefully interfaith dialogue. And only the Ribono shel olam knows how many teiere Yiddishe neshamos were saved by these critical positions espoused by the Rav zecher tzadik livracha. And nevertheless מעשה שהיה כך היה. In the early eighties when the right before Bein Keseh L'asor there was a massacre in the Palestinian detention camps administered by the Israeli army. Though the massacre was clearly not perpetrated by Jews, there were suspicions of passive complicity by some Israeli army officials. The Rav zecher tzadik livracha was profoundly outraged. Now here you have to have a little bit of background. The Rav never mingled in political affairs. If his counsel was sought he was forthcoming, but he never ever intruded himself upon politics. Also you must understand how the Rav zecher tzaddik livracha treasured Yom HaKippurim. How he would passionately, passionately quote from the Machzor of Yom Kippur. How he would lyrically describe Yom HaKippurim as a glorious day of Amida lifnei Hashem. He had no time for politics any day of the year, certainly not erev Yom HaKippurim. And yet on that erev Yom HaKippurim, ועיני ראו ולא זר, the Rav zecher tzaddik livracha called a minister from the government and demanded an immediate inquiry to uncover the truth and the strongest measures possible to forestall any future violations. מעשה שהיה כך היה. There was a gentile cleaning lady in Boston. She had been abandoned by her husband. She struggled to support herself and her children, but she struggled unsuccessfully. Unbeknownst to all, the Rav zecher tzaddik livracha supported her. Listen again to that excerpt from the Rav's drasha at the Chinuch Atzmai dinner. The Rav said at the time, I am most proud this evening for the presence of Mizrachi, Histadrut HaRabbanim, Moriah Shul, and I am especially proud that I myself came though I strongly feared that the yetzer hara would subvert my intentions. The Rav zecher tzaddik livracha did not take pride or express pride in being nor would he even comment or acknowledge the fact on being the preeminent Gaon Hador. He did not take pride, express pride, or even seek to command, to command the allegiance of so many talmidim and devotees. But he was immensely proud and he did express his pride in having talmidim and devotees who were yesharim. And the Rav zecher tzaddik livracha was the yashar par excellence. But then again, this too is part of the mesorah Brisk that he received from his father Rav Moshe and from Rav Chaim. And if you'll allow me one more מעשה שהיה כך היה. Reb Baruch recently told this story during the shiva. After the Communist revolution in Russia, Rav Moshe Soloveitchik and his family had not yet managed to leave. A frum Jew and a Communist official came to Reb Moshe that he settle a dispute. The Communist accused the Jew of having received a cow and not making payment. The Jew denied the charge. Reb Moshe questioned both sides employing an interpreter to communicate with the Communist. Then unexpectedly, the frum Jew leaned forward and whispered into Reb Moshe's ear, knowing that it would be unintelligible to the other baal din, to the other litigant, Rebbe, מאכט מיט אים אפשרה. Cut a deal with him, Rebbe. Reb Moshe realized immediately that this was an implicit admission of guilt by the Jew. He exploded from his seat and he bellowed at the Jew, pay him his money in full! The Jewish litigant was frozen, terrified. Again Reb Moshe thundered, pay him his money now. The Jewish litigant submissively did as he was told and departed. The Communist then turned to Reb Moshe and said, I knew you were a holy rabbi. Now I see that you are an angelic rabbi. Postscript: this Communist official was later instrumental in helping Reb Moshe and his family cross the border out of Communist Russia into Poland. I could continue on these themes and please don't be misled; an attempt has been made to portray one dimension of the Rav, his emes, his yashrus, merely one dimension of a very great multi-dimensional personality. The hour is late, ויתר ממה שקראתי לפניכם כתוב כאן. However, I ask your indulgence just to conclude with the words of the Rambam in Sefer Hamitzvos, Mitzvas Asei Gimmel. היא שציוונו לאהבו יתעלה. We are commanded to love the Ribono Shel Olam.

וזה שנתבונן ונשכיל מצוותיו ופעולותיו עד שנשיגהו ונתענג בהשגתו תכלית התענוג וזאת היא האהבה המחויבת. ולשון ספרי, לפי שנאמר ואהבת את ה' אלקיך, איני יודע כיצד אוהב את המקום, תלמוד לומר והיו הדברים האלה אשר אנכי מצוך היום על לבבך, שמתוך כך אתה מכיר את מי שאמר והיה העולם.

Kimdumeh, in reading the Rambam, he clearly intends not only to cite the Sifrei but to interpret it as well. In his definition of the mitzvah, before quoting the Sifrei's definition, the Sifrei's parallel definition of the mitzvah, so the Rambam emphasizes shenisbonen venaskil. Then he tells you the Sifrei says, how does a person reach ahavas Hashem? Through Talmud Torah. Clearly the Rambam is sending a message that casual superficial learning doesn't induce ahavas Hashem. When one is misbonen and maskil, when there's a concerted effort to delve into Torah, to understand and experience the profundities of Torah, then such learning will induce ahavas Hashem. Who better than the Rav zichrono livracha exemplified this? His brilliant unflagging Talmud Torah was matched by his passionate ahavas Hashem. He had such an immediate sense of שויתי ה' לנגדי תמיד. He once described in a drasha how in a personal eis tzara he could feel the Ribono Shel Olam kavyachol standing behind him, kavyachol hovering over his shoulder, kavyachol and encouraging him. A person is misbonen and maskil be-mitzvotav. מתוך כך אתה מכיר מי שאמר והיה העולם and even more. The Rambam concludes in this mitzvah of ahavas Hashem in Sefer HaMitzvos that there is a second component to the mitzvah as well: ahaveihu al habrios to bring others closer to ahavas Hashem. And this too he cites from the Sifri. Again, lechora, according to this second within this second component of ahavas Hashem as well, the way one accomplishes ahaveihu al habrios is also through Talmud Torah. The Rav never engaged in kiruv. The Rav sat and was mak'hil kehilos berabim. He said shiurim, he gave drashos, he paskened shailos. But in his personification of Torah chasuma nitna, the way he embodied the totality of Torah, you were exposed to the grandeur of Torah. And when you saw it coming from an adam yashar,

נתאהב שם שמים על ידו מתחלת העולם ועד סופה. אינו דומה שמיעה לראייה

for many years I had heard that the teshuvah movement in the then Soviet Union owed a great deal to the Rav's writings, especially his essay The Lonely Man of Faith. But אינו דומה שמיעה לראייה. When I was in the Soviet Union and at the time it was still the Soviet Union, so I heard it, I heard it with my own ears, people whose appreciation for Yiddishkeit was so great and profound that they literally, literally were ready to be moseer nefesh. And they volunteered, you know how we started, you know what started us on the path to Torah, to the Ribbono Shel Olam? We read an essay of Rav Soloveitchik's. נתאהב שם שמים על ידו מתחלת העולם ועד סופה. One other story, just told to my mother within the past week or two. A young boy, a teenager living out in a place called Eugene, Oregon, without a shul, without a day school, no Yiddishkeit. Calls up, he wants to attend some NCSY summer program. But he's frum, and not only is he frum, but his whole family is becoming frum. How did you become frum? What were you exposed to? My grandfather sent me a book in the mail and I read the book and then I decided I wanted to be religious. What book did your grandfather send you? He sent me a book called Reflections of the Rav. This young boy read the book and he saw, as all of us did when we heard the Rav, when we listened to him, when we continued to read his ksavim, he saw the unmatched profundity of Torah, the unparalleled beauty of Torah, all of it expressed by a person who himself himself embodied the concepts of Torah. נתקדש שם שמים על ידו מתחילת העולם ועד סופו.