[Avodah] letter of RSRH

[T613K at aol.com]

From: Micha Berger _micha at aishdas.org_ (mailto:micha at aishdas.org) 

RMB:   >>Bottom line is that RSRH was against Jews trying to redeem  
themselves
politically or try to bring the ge'ulah through hishtadlus.  ...
Someone might take the new realia that emerged after his petirah  and
reach the conclusion that RSRH wouldn't have been anti-Zionist  (perhaps
only non-Z). But I personally don't see how to construct such a  thing.<<
 
 

TK:  Hirsch followed the majority of gedolim and poskim in all  matters and 
would certainly have been an Agudist or something similar.   Non-Zionist.  As 
for political action, in the first 19 centuries after the  churban it was 
almost universally accepted and expected that Hashem would send  Moshiach, not that 
we would do it ourselves.  Hirsch was a Torah Jew, not a  navi and certainly 
not a secular visionary.  He thought what everyone  in the Torah world thought 
-- that Hashem would send  Moshiach.   At the same time, in Germany Hirsch 
was very much  involved in the 19th century political move toward greater 
liberalization of the  laws, more civil rights for Jews and so on.  He even served 
for a  time in the Parliament or some such body in one German state.  


Old TK:  :                Overall, it seems to me ...
:                that the Hashgacha has a  plan for the 
: Jewish people that  includes both a strong Torah-only community in  Eretz 
: Yisrael AND a  Torah-plus-work community in chutz la'aretz....

RMB:  >>TIDE  isn't Torah uParnasah. That's yet another hashkafah.

But why are you  limiting Torah-only to EY, and Torah-applied to chul?<<
 
TK: You are correct that working for a living isn't by itself TIDE.   Most 
chassidim work.  But it so happens that the majority of the black hat,  RWO 
(right wing Orthodox) olam in America is functionally, even if not  consciously, 
TIDE -- because TIDE is the only way a large community can possibly  exist in 
this day and age.  Most RWO go to college, even if just BTL plus  grad school.  
Virtually all go to high school and are literate in a secular  language and 
have had exposure to secular literature (even if only enough to  pass the NY 
State English Regents exam to get a high school diploma).  We  read and write in 
English, not Yiddish.  We have a vast efflorescence of  Torah writing in 
English, books and magazines.  We learn Torah in  English.  We interact with the 
non-Jewish world not only on the level of  simple commerce but on an 
intellectual level as well -- we are intellectually  engaged in "da ma shetashiv." I 
could go on and on but my point is the same  point I've made  before -- TIDE is 
the only way to go in a modern  democracy, the only way that Torah survival is 
possible.  Any older ideal  of "Torah only" can only succeed nowadays in a 
small, enclosed,  self-selected community that enjoys the luxury of being 
embedded in a  larger TIDE community.  BTW the Torah-only community (including some 
of my  own sibs) do not see themselves as a subset of a larger TIDE community, 
but that  is how I see them, regardless of how they see themselves.
 
As for your question, "Why are you limiting Torah-only to EY?" the answer  
is, it seems that that is what the Hashgacha desires.   If it were up  to me I'd 
have a TIDE community in E'Y too, with a small group--our modern  Shevet 
Levi--learning Torah full time, supported willingly and happily by the  rest.   
However, it is not up to me.  Hashgacha has so worked  things out that people 
who want to learn gravitate towards E'Y while people who  want to obtain a 
higher secular education and who want to work gravitate towards  chu'l.  I'm using 
the word "people" very loosely here, mainly thinking of  RWO.

...
Old TK:  A sign of the essential yiras Shamayim of  Yekkes in general and 
Hirschians  
: in particular is that when they do  (unfortunately) deviate from TIDE  
: philosophical purity, they tend  usually to head right rather than left. I
: speak of their Torah affiliation,  not their political views.  

RMB:  >>Lo sosuru mikol  asher yagidu lekha semol? I seem to remember another 
bit
to that  pasuq.<<
 
TK:  That pasuk means that you are not to deviate from the halacha as  taught 
and poskened by the rabbanim, poskim and Torah leaders of your day.   It has 
nothing to do with philosophic and hashkafic "left" and  "right."   The Torah 
does not speak of a hashkafa which is "in the  middle" and certainly does not 
tell us that hashkafically a person has to be in  the middle between the Torah 
leaders on one side and secular leaders on the  other side.  If your personal 
rebbe muvhak or rav is considered to be  RW in the Torah world, you should 
not deviate from his teachings -- that's what  your pasuk means. It does NOT 
mean that you should seek out some rebbe who is  considered Emtza and avoid all 
RW rabbanim!
 
 
 
 
 

RMB:  >>Yekkes differ toward Litvishkeit because Litta  exported its talmud
Torah. That's not a shift to the left or the right, but a  shift from
basing avodah on menchlachkeit to basing it on talmud Torah.  Calling it
left-vs-right belies the complexity of the differences in  thought.<<
 
TK:  I am not at all sure what you're saying, but when Yekkes move  away from 
TIDE and towards a "Torah-only" model of avodas Hashem, they certainly  do 
not become less menshlich.  However what I really had in mind when I  said that 
Yekkes who deviate show their yiras Shomayim by moving right  rather than left 
is that the other choice they had was to move left --  towards MO.  And that 
is what they tend not to do.  Of course I would  prefer that they not move at 
all, but remain true to their Hirschian  heritage.

...
Old TK:  : I am totally and absolutely convinced  that they are both wrong.  

: What has happened in E'Y in the last  hundred years simply cannot be  
ignored, 
: cannot be gainsaid, and  cannot -- chas vesholom even to say such a  thing 
-- 
: all be  attributed to the workings of the Sitra Achra...

RMB:  >>And  what does that have to do with my insisting you can't project 
back
onto what  RSRH would have said?<<
 
TK:  Both you and SBA insisted that Hirsch would have been Neturei  Karta or 
Satmar in his attitude towards the modern Israeli state if he  were alive 
today.  I am certain that is NOT true.  He would have been  RWO, non-Zionist but 
would have viewed developments in E'Y as overwhelmingly  positive and a sign of 
Divine benevolence.  
 





--Toby  Katz
=============






**************Need a new ride? Check out the largest site for U.S. used car 
listings at AOL Autos.      
(http://autos.aol.com/used?NCID=aolcmp00300000002851)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20080430/6c3bbded/attachment-0002.htm>