Three Dialectics in R. Weinberg's Thought
MODERN
RABBINIC THOUGHT
By
Rav
Lecture
#36: Three Dialectics in R.
Weinbergs Thought
Certain
opposing and balancing themes recur in R. Weinbergs writings. For example, he notes the need to
integrate the qualities of youth with those of age and experience. The gemara relates (Bava
Kama 97) that Avrahams coins featured a young boy and girl on one side and
an older couple on the other. R.
Weinberg writes that this represents Avrahams ability to combine the
revolutionary ardor of youth with the good judgment of the aged. Like a younger person, Avraham excelled
at selfsacrifice and the willingness to embark on a lonely path. Resembling an older person, he showed
patience and arrived at decisions in a thought-out manner.
The
inclusion of Sarah on both sides of the Abrahamic currency indicates that this
combination also applied to the relationship between our first patriarch and
matriarch. Even at an advanced age,
they maintained the youthful ardor of young lovers, but they still acted with
the dignified purity of a couple advanced in years.[1]
In
a brilliant aggadic commentary, R. Weinberg applies this dialectic to the
balance between Halakha and Aggada.
R. Yitzchak Nafcha was once unable to begin teaching because his two
students, R. Ami and R Assi, debated whether to study Aggada or Halakha. He compared the students to a man with
two wives, one younger and one older.
The younger wife plucks out her husbands grey hairs, while the older
wife removes his dark hairs. As a
result, the husband goes bald. To
break the deadlock, R. Yitzchak taught his students an idea that incorporated
both Halakha and Aggada in which he cites a verse referring to a wall of fire
(Bava Kama 60b).
R.
Weinberg explains that younger and older wives symbolize Aggada and Halakha.
Jewish law stands for order, consistency, stability, and continuity, whereas
Aggada reflects dynamism, enthusiasm, and the desire for fresh conquests. Like
the two wives in the parable, R. Ami and R. Assis fighting created a situation
in which nothing was accomplished. In truth, Judaism depends on successful
integration of Halakha and Aggada; R. Yitzchak therefore taught an idea
combining the two disciplines. The
specific verse cited enhances the educational message. The steady performance of Halakha
provides the stability and protection of a wall, while the spirit and energy of
Aggada supplies the fire. Thus, the
integrated message resembles a wall of fire.[2]
While
the two previously cited sections present an equal balance between youth and
age, a third emphasizes the significance of the elderly. After a seven year hiatus in Germany, R.
Weinberg returned to Pilwishki and delivered a sermon[3]
that included a poignant longing for a simpler time before the suffering of
World War I. The main body of the
sermon begins with a verse from Ezra (3:12) in which elders who remember
the first Temple see the second Temple and cry, while others react with the
joy. What caused some elders to
tearfully respond to a joyous occasion?
Many Jews elected to stay in Babylon rather than return to the land of
their forefathers. Furthermore,
some elders resented witnessing burgeoning success since they anticipated not
living long enough to reap the rewards. On the other hand, some elders took joy
in the knowledge that the next generation had a precious opportunity. For
example, Yaakov was exhilarated by the idea of Yosefs success, irrespective of
whether or not he would survive long enough to experience it. Perhaps the source
of the elders tears can be located elsewhere.
R.
Weinberg offers a strong argument in favor of dependency on tradition. All scientific and material progress
relies on the work of predecessors; indeed, scientists do not ignore previously
acquired knowledge and start from scratch.
This is all the more true when it comes to spiritual matters. Elders not only impart wisdom, they
stand for crucial values. Older
people appreciate the significance of family ties and of attachment to a
homeland. Some see these emotions
as an expression of an elderly weakness that insists on living in the past. That explanation has some truth but does
not fully capture the phenomena. In
fact, many elderly people retain the vitality and excitement of youth. R. Weinberg lists both Jewish and
gentile sages who carried such optimistic energy into their advanced years. He refers to the Alter from Sloboka and
R. Eliyahu Baruch Kammai, as well as to philosopher and psychologist Wilhelm
Wundt, botanist Ernst Hackel, and French statesman Georges Clemenceau.[4]
Conservative traditionalism and creative innovation can coexist as in the
British national character.
Young
people often fall captive to the apparent splendor of a new idea and run blindly
after it. Possessed with a powerful will to conquer, such youth truly end up
subject to a novel idea. Only the
elderly have the maturity and understanding to graft the new on to the old,
rather than to fully replace the old with the new. For this reason, the elderly connect
more easily to religion, since they appreciate the value of the eternal. The
Torahs command to respect the elderly (Vayikra 19:32) reflects more than
ethical sensitivity or pragmatic calculation; it conveys a fundamental principle
of our religious outlook. Redeeming our people depends not only on the muscles
and energy of the youth, but also on the spirit of the aged. When the time had come to redeem the
Jews from Egyptian bondage, Moshe turned to the elders and not to the youth
(Shemot 3:16).
This
background enables us to understand the story from Sefer Ezra. Armed with the experience of the first
Temple, the elders understood the difficult challenge of making the second
Temple a place of holiness, and they feared that Am Yisrael might not
meet the challenge. Such trepidation motivates tears. Strikingly, R. Weinberg
writes that this very reaction also engendered the joy. Seeing a yearning for
sanctity leading to profound emotion of sadness inspired others to react with
optimism and happiness.
Although
R. Weinbergs sermon ends with a call for combining the strengths of the young
and the aged, the main thrust stresses our reliance on the wisdom of the
elderly. Perhaps R. Weinberg was addressing a crowd overly focused on novelty
and youth. He needed to remind them
of the wisdom accumulated over many years of Jewish
history.
Another
short piece of aggadic commentary links Avraham with the need for
consistency. Whoever fixes a place
for his prayer will find the God of Avraham aiding him (Berakhot
6b). R. Weinberg states that
regularity and routine are necessary pedagogic tools for impacting on the
personality. As a revolutionary monotheist, Avraham could have stood only for
freshness and novelty, but he valued the power of consistency. This revolutionary established the ideas
of daily prayer and of a set location for praying. Avraham understood that every individual
has limited moments of inspiration and uplift. Rather than endlessly waiting for such
moments, daily prayer maintains a steady dialogue with our Maker.[5]
A
related dialectic centers on the balance between past and future. Here, R.
Weinberg emphasizes a vibrant Judaism that means much more than looking back
with nostalgia. The nostalgia approach leads to a Judaism of cemeteries and
yahrzeits. For this reason, Chazal say that Torah is not just a
morasha, an inheritance, but a meorasa, a betrothed
(Pesachim 49b). Our relationship to Torah does not resemble a grandchild
relating to a grandmother. The grandchild shows the grandmother respect and
affection but does not truly allow her to impact on personal life. Instead, we interact with Torah as a
beloved, who constantly affects who we are and how we behave. We revere the
age-old wisdom of Judaism even as we find freshness and individuality within
it. Even someone whose ancestors
bequeathed him a Torah scroll must write his own (Sanhedrin 21b).[6]
One
Chanukah sermon compares the Sadducees with nineteenth-century Jewish
assimilationists. Both revered the old but avoided fresh application to
today. For the Sadducees, this
became manifest in a rejection of the vibrancy of the Oral Law. For their modern
counterparts, it inspired a Judaism of veneration for the past that dropped
religious demands in the present.[7]
Integrating
past and future explains the great value our Sages place on juxtaposing
redemption and prayer. Each
morning, we conclude the blessing redeemer of Israel just before beginning the
amida. According to R.
Weinberg, the redemption theme focuses on Gods grand past actions on our
behalf, while prayer predominantly concerns requests for the future. A Judaism
that only looks back remains orphaned and barren. Conversely, one that ignores the past
lacks the reservoirs of strength and wisdom found in a national history. R.
Weinberg sends a message to contemporary Jewish nationalists: Genuine redemption depends upon the
creation of an autonomous Jewish spirit, not only on physical liberation.
He
adds a beautiful reading about the connection between our ancestors and the land
of Israel. One gemara says
that all of the Land of Israel curled into a ball, upon which Yaakov rested his
head, and this act enabled his descendents to conquer and settle the Land
(Chullin 91b). Another
gemara states that Kalev briefly left the other spies to fortify himself
at the graves of the patriarchs in Chevron (Sota 34b). R. Weinberg
interprets these sources on a psychological, rather than on a metaphysical,
plane. Praying at a particular spot
or touching certain land does not grant magical powers. Rather, identifying with
the dreams and ideals of ancestors fills us with energy and inspiration. Such
factors enabled Kalev to stick to his ideals and inspired Yaakovs offspring to
maintain their connection to this Land.[8]
R.
Weinbergs preference for the moral and psychological over the metaphysical also
emerges from another passage analyzing Yaakovs dream vision. In Bereishit 28, Yaakov has a
dream of angels ascending and descending on a ladder and God informs him that He
is the God of Avraham and Yitzchak. Yaakov responds by declaring, How full of
awe is this place. For R. Weinberg, it is not the angelic beings that fill
Yaakov with awe, but the knowledge that he has encountered the God of his
fathers. Walking in the path of his
father and grandfather in maintaining a relationship with divinity inspires and
humbles Yaakov.
Reverence
for ancestry deserves great respect. R. Weinberg tells the story of the German
Jewish Foreign Minster Rathenau driving to shul on Yon Kippur to say
kaddish for his father. When some Polish Jews in shul snickered at
the idea of someone desecrating the holy Day of Atonement in order to say
kaddish, R. Weinberg instructed them to desist. He argued that we should
not mock respect for parents, a fundamental value that can engender authentic
spiritual striving.[9]
A
final dialectic merges the best of Eastern European and Western European
Jewry. As we have seen, R. Weinberg
studied in Slobodka and also received a doctorate in Germany. He saw the
contributions of each community and wrote about them. Some of his early German
writings represent the attempt to explain Eastern European Jewry to the
enlightened Germans, who often looked down on the Ostjuden. Conversely, he defended Germany Jewry
from critiques from the East. A
powerful example of the latter appears in the eulogy he delivered for R.
Ehrentreu, Rav of Munich.
Critics
of German Orthodoxys philosophy of Torah im Derekh Eretz contended that
it reflects a desire to enjoy this world and the World to Come but lacks
authentic Jewish spirit. R. Weinberg admits to the cogency of this critique
regarding some bourgeois Jews, but he asserts that it totally misses the mark
regarding such figures as R. Ehrentreu and R. Shimshon Raphael Hirsch. These
titans of the spirit successfully integrated passionate commitment to Torah with
broader knowledge.[10]
In
a fascinating aside, R. Weinberg opens a window into his conception of
integrating Judaism and general culture. He ridicules the idea that an authentic
combination of faith and culture can be found in the manufacture of a Shabbat
belt to carry keys or in the creation of a cream enabling the observant Jew to
shave. These are technicalities that do not truly touch on the world of the
spirit. Indeed, R. Weinbergs
writings reveal familiarity with the ideas of Kant, Rousseau, Spinoza, and many
great gentile thinkers.
In
this context, it is also worth noting that R. Weinberg denies that R. Hirschs
endorsement of secular studies was a concession to difficult times. In truth,
worldly engagement reflects a permanent ideal for R. Hirsch.[11]
Although this point clearly emerges from R. Hirschs writings themselves, it
bears noting that a gadol intimately familiar with German Orthodoxy very
clearly declared that this represents R. Hirschs position.
Where did R. Weinberg see himself among the various factions? Scholars debate whether to view him as an eternally conflicted figure of a person with an overarching and unified vision. His old friend, Shmuel Atlas, asserted the later conception.[12] Along similar lines, Marc Shapiro portrays R. Weinberg as a figure identifying with the essential tenets of Modern Orthodoxy. In his review of Shapiros book, Jeffrey Woolf argues for a more conflicted image of R. Weinberg.[13] Either way, R. Weinberg was a penetrating and important rabbinic thinker whose oeuvre of Jewish thought deserves more attention in our curriculum.
[1] Lifrakim, p.
375.
[2] Ibid., pp.
333-335.
[3] Ibid., pp.
253-264.
[4] Ibid., pp.
260-261
[5] Ibid., pp. 360-361.
[6] Ibid., pp.
547-548.
[7] Ibid., pp.
538-544.
[8] Ibid., pp. 397-398.
[9] Ibid., pp.
605-606.
[10] Ibid., pp.
408-409.
[11] Ibid., p.
218.
[12] Shmuel Atlas,
Ha-Gaon Rabbi Yehiel Yaakov Weinberg ztl: Kavim Le-Demuto,
Sinai 58, p. 282.
[13] Jeffrey Woolf, The
Legacy of R. Yehiel Jacob Weinberg, Azure 12 (2002), pp.
202-210.
This website is constantly being improved. We would appreciate hearing from you. Questions and comments on the classes are welcome, as is help in tagging, categorizing, and creating brief summaries of the classes. Thank you for being part of the Torat Har Etzion community!