<html>
<body>
The following if from
<a href="http://tinyurl.com/2bwjoha" eudora="autourl">
http://tinyurl.com/2bwjoha</a><br><br>
<font size=3>Avraham Yosef, Rav of Cholon and son of Rav Ovadia
Yosef, "addressed R’ Amsalem’s remarks directly saying 'Anyone
who says that only those who are destined to become truly great in Torah
should be sitting and learning is an apikores. Those who learn
Torah are the true soldiers who are fighting on the front lines and
protecting us. Without their learning, we have no continuity, there
is no life to our soul. Furthermore, those who live a life of
poverty in order to learn Torah remove themselves from the gashmius of
this world and are able to attain a higher level of
spirituality.'"<br><br>
</font>I think it is instructive to contrast these remarks with following
that are from Rav Dr. Yosef Breuer's essay "Vocation and
Calling" that appears on pages 496 - 500 of Rav Breuer's Essays - A
Unique Approach.<br><br>
This, incidentally, brings to mind the oft-repeated question<br>
whether it should not be welcomed if bachurim express the desire<br>
to “remain in learning.” “Remain”? Should not everyone “remain<br>
in learning”? Evidently what is meant is the exclusive occupation<br>
with Torah study. If this involves the student’s full-time
occupation<br>
with “learning” for a period of several years before embarking<br>
upon a professional career, such a decision should only be welcomed.<br>
We would have serious misgivings, however, if the decision<br>
of exclusive “learning” would exclude any thought of a practical<br>
preparation for the demands of life. Every profession requires<br>
training. This may not be possible at a more advanced age. (The<br>
chance of entering the firm of one’s future father-in-law where<br>
further training is possible is not normally given to the average<br>
student.) On the other hand, few possess the ability to become a<br>
Rosh Yeshiva. To be able to “learn” does not at all mean that one is<br>
able to teach.<br><br>
In this connotation, the following word of wisdom comes to<br>
mind, albeit in a loftier, more far-reaching interpretation:
“Thousands<br>
occupy themselves with the Written Teaching, but mere<br>
hundreds emerge who actually possess it; tens occupy themselves<br>
with the Talmud, but only one actually masters it — and thus<br>
muses Koheles: ‘One man I found among thousands’” (Midrash<br>
Rabbah Koheles 7).<br><br>
In every case, the responsible officials of our Torah institutions<br>
should carefully determine, after a given period of time, whether<br>
the individual student possesses the qualifications to justify the<br>
choice of Torah study as an occupation, or whether it would not be<br>
necessary to suggest to him to concern himself with his professional<br>
training (while, of course, continuing to be <i>Koveah itim l'Torah</i>).
In many<br>
of the latter cases the school officials would do well not to rely
on<br>
the self-judgment of the individual student.<br><br>
Is it conceivable that the high praise that Tehillim (128) reserves<br>
for the head of the family who labors and cares for his wife and<br>
children would be directed only to the “less gifted” among our<br>
people? “Happy is he who fears God, who walks in God’s ways”—<br>
true fear of God presupposes <i>limud haTorah </i>in the firm desire to
apply<br>
all Torah knowledge to a life devoted to the service of God; “thus<br>
he may enjoy (as <i>Yoreh HaShem</i>) the labors of his hands . . . happy
is he, for<br>
<font face="Arial, Helvetica" size=3>his is the good.” “Love the labor”:
this is the severe admonition of<br>
the Sages (Pirkei Avos 1:10).<br><br>
“Torah study that is unconnected with practical work ultimately<br>
ceases to exist and results in transgression” (ibid. 2:2). This<br>
means: He who fails to pursue his
</font><font face="Arial, Helvetica" size=3><i>Parnasah
</i></font><font face="Arial, Helvetica" size=3>while studying the Torah
is<br>
in danger of encountering economic difficulties that may not only<br>
force him to abandon his Torah studies but even, because of the<br>
lack of proper professional training,may cause him, in the quest for<br>
</font><font face="Arial, Helvetica" size=3><i>Parnasah</i></font>
<font face="Arial, Helvetica" size=3>, to violate the great precepts of
straightness and honesty that<br>
must distinguish the bearers of Torah, if their lives are to serve
as<br>
Kiddush Hashem rather than belie the validity of God’s Torah (see<br>
Orach Chayim 156).<br><br>
We need the greats of Torah. But we also need men, solid
</font><font face="Arial, Helvetica" size=3><i>b'nei<br>
</i>Torah</font><font face="Arial, Helvetica" size=3>, who prove
themselves as conscientious Yehudim in every<br>
type of profession, thus striving towards the lofty goal envisioned<br>
by the faithful of our people: to serve with their lives, before all
the<br>
world, the sanctification of the Divine Will — Kiddush Hashem.<br><br>
I can only wonder how R. </font>Avraham Yosef would react to what Rav
Breuer wrote. Would he consider Rav Breuer's words
<i>apikorsus</i>? I certainly hope not! Furthermore, R. Amsalem
suggested that those learning study such things as shechita, safrus and
Mila, whereas Rav Breuer talks of preparing for a profession without
limiting this profession to these few areas. <br><br>
In light of what Rav Breuer wrote did R. Amsalem really say anything
wrong? <br>
<x-sigsep><p></x-sigsep>
Yitzchok Levine</body>
</html>