Judaism's Encounter with Other Cultures by Jacob J. Schacter

Author:Jacob J. Schacter
Language: eng
Format: epub
ISBN: 9781461629283
Publisher: ROWMAN & LITTLEFIELD PUBLISHERS, INC.

Even if one allows for a measure of exaggeration in these reports, in fact they were published by contemporaries of the Gaon (with the exception of the second report which, however, is reported in the name of a contemporary of the Gaon) who knew him personally. Moreover, the tradents themselves were men of integrity whose scholarly credentials were impeccable.12 These, then, should hardly be treated as imaginary tales that were reduced to writing for the first time many generations after the events they purportedly describe. Clearly, the Gaon viewed secular wisdom positively and instrumentally, i.e., its value depended upon the light it could shed on Torah.

In recent years, the Gaon’s positive view of secular wisdom appears to have received unexpected support from the publication of R. Hillel of Shklov’s hd-Tor. R. Hillel (d. 1838) was a disciple of the Gaon who settled in Jerusalem in 1809. His Kol ha-Tor, an eschatological work based on the Gaon’s teaching, remained in manuscript form until 1946, when several fascicles of the original appeared in print. Fuller versions were published between 1969 and 1994 in Bnei Brak and Jerusalem. R. Hillel cites, in the name of the Gaon of Vilna, an elaborate eschatology in which the spread of secular wisdom among Jews at the end of time plays a decisive role in bringing about the ultimate redemption of mankind.13

Conversely, R. Samson Raphael Hirsch (d. 1888) and R. Azriel Hildesheimer (d. 1899), the modern architects of Torah and derekh ereẓ, lived, breathed and taught the centrality of Torah. They repeatedly underscored their conviction that derekh ereẓ was subservient to Torah (more about which see below, passim). The issue, then, is not whether secular wisdom may (or even: ought to) be pursued, but rather: which secular disciplines, under what circumstances, and by whom. The Gaon of Vilna, for example, was not prepared to interrupt his daily regimen in order to master Greek or Latin and read Josephus in the original. But he felt quite comfortable in encouraging other Jews, whose obligation to study Torah—at least in theory—was no different than the Gaon’s to translate Josephus into Hebrew.

The extreme positions aside, a spacious middle ground remains, embracing a broad spectrum of opinion—ranging from those who tolerated general culture only under the most circumscribed of conditions, to those who, for example, embraced secular study enthusiastically, and even incorporated it in the yeshiva curriculum.

There can be no question that the dominant position of East European gedolei yisrael in recent memory has been the open rejection of general culture. This, despite—and sometimes due to—the advent of modernity and the opportunities and benefits it has provided for the Jewish community at large. The ḥatam Sofer, R. Yosef Baer Soloveitchik (author of Bet ha-Levi), the Hafeẓ ḥayyim, R. Elhanan Wasserman, the ḥazon Ish, R. Aharon Kotler—and virtually every ḥasidic Rebbe of note—are among the many Torah giants who shared this view.

Orthodox teaching, however, has never been in the habit of speaking in only one voice. Diverse figures such as Rabbis Samson Raphael Hirsch, ẓadok ha-Kohen of Lublin, Israel Salanter, Abraham Isaac ha-Kohen Kook, and Joseph B.

Download

Copyright Disclaimer:
This site does not store any files on its server. We only index and link to content provided by other sites. Please contact the content providers to delete copyright contents if any and email us, we'll remove relevant links or contents immediately.