[Avodah] Interesting Netziv

[Micha Berger]

On Mon, December 24, 2007 10:44 am, R Moshe Y. Gluck wrote:
: See Birchas HaNetziv ... where he says that at Churban Bayis Sheini
: there were three groups, the Essenes, the Philosophers, and the Anshei
: Knesses Hagedolah.... The Essenes, he says were ascetic, separated
: from people and were a Merkavah L'shchinah. They were unsuccessful at
: ensuring the survival of Klal Yisroel. The Philosphers ended up
: producing the Tzedukim. Only the Perushim, who were Osek B'pilpula
: D'oraisa and were Marbeh Talmidim succeeded in ensuring Klal Yisroel's
: survival.

I would agree with RMYG's assumption that the Netziv wasn't really
talking history, but for a different reason.

I find this identification of the Tzeduqim to scream "darsheini". The
last thing a philosopher would want to do is reduce the role of
intellectual pursuit and tell people all they have to do is read the
text. Revelation and philosophy were at the time competitive concepts.
Rather, the Tzeduqim are clearly related to the success of the
Chashmonai rebellion. Once the Chashmonaim held two of the seats of
power -- the kehunah and the melukhah -- of course they and their
loyalists would embrace a philosophy that reduces the role of the
rabbinate, the soul remaining seat of power (barring nevu'ah). The
Tzeduqim were not only literalist, but by doing so, they also were far
more about temple cult than the Torah actually is.

It therefore looks more like the Netziv was trying to map Josephus's
description of the three leading movements to make a contemporary
message.

That said, I don't know what that message was intended to be. I don't
think RMYG's suggestion fits the Netziv's world.

: The reason why I bring this up - and it might be obvious to everyone
: here but me - is that it seems from this that the Volozhin school of
: thought, as explicated by the Netziv, which was predisposed against
: Chassidus (which could be seen as a parallel to the Essenes) and
: against secular study (analogous to the Philosophers), saw itself as
: keeping alive the tradition....

While the Gra was hostile to Chassidus, R' Chaim Volozhiner welcomed
Chassidim to the yeshiva. Arguably, because he felt that Litvisher
Torah would cure what ailed them, but that's speculation. Two
generations later, R' Yisrael Salanter's encounter with the Rebbe
Rasha"b (described by RAEK in
<http://www.aishdas.org/raek/2derachim.pdf>) did have a "our way is
better" competitive edge (at least in how it's remembered). But not
"your way is altogether wrong". Then you had the Chiddushei haRim and
Sefas Emes as examples of Chassidim who could out-Litta the Litvaks.
By the Netziv's day, this kind of opposition was not inherent in
Volozhin. True Gra-style hisnagdus didn't really last among the
rabbinate very long.

Also, the Chassidim weren't seen as ascetics. The Mussarists fell prey
to that accusation. The accusations against the Chassidim were much
the reverse. You don't accuse people who believe in ecstatic joyous
worship of being ascetic; it doesn't stick.

SheTir'u baTov!
-micha

-- 
Micha Berger             One who kills his inclination is as though he
micha at aishdas.org        brought an offering. But to bring an offering,
http://www.aishdas.org   you must know where to slaughter and what
Fax: (270) 514-1507      parts to offer.        - R' Simcha Zissel Ziv