Recently, the national religious daily Hatzofeh,
published articles by various educators and public figures
who acknowledged the education failure of the yeshiva
tichonit system, which has been showing worrying signs of
weakness.
In the wake of the controversy over the issue,
Hatzofeh journalist Shaul Schiff publicized a letter
which he received from a very "central figure in Zionist-
Torah education."
The man writes: "It is clear to me that my remarks are liable
to cause a veritable commotion, or at least to make many of
Hatzofeh's readers jump. But it seems to me that they
must serve as the focal point of the discussion over our
future and that of our children. I don't intend to attack
anyone or any side, but rather to attack the idea, which
resulted in our current situation.
"During the past 25 years, a full, controlled and planned
replacement system (not to say purging) of all of the
chareidi ramim with our ramim, has taken
place," he writes.
He says that this stems from the objective to apprise the
younger generation of the aschalta d'geula viewpoint,
and the partnership with nationalistic ideology. "The
chareidi (or blacks as we called them) ramim could not
fulfill that role properly. Sometimes, debates and friction
between our children (their students), and our homes were
formed, and we know of quite a number of instances of
chareidization and the crossing of lines.
"It was definitely impossible to ignore the problem. But
today, we are obligated to ask if we chose the correct
solution. Is the price we are currently paying worthwhile? Is
this really the child for whom we prayed?
"The 'old' ramim have been replaced by our
chevra, graduates of Yeshivas Mercaz HaRav or of
hesder yeshivos. True, there is no doubt that the
young students identify more closely with ramim who
wear knitted kippos and who served in the army and
speak their language. But the question is: does the message
they convey work? Is it possible to inculcate our children
with double messages, which sometimes even seem
contradictory?"
He notes that the chareidi ramim tried to convey an
unequivocal message to their students in the yeshiva high
schools: the message that Torah study is the most important
aim. "Even if today, students identify more closely with
their ramim, the message conveyed by the chareidi
ramim was absorbed. True, not all of the students
remained avreichim or became rabbonim, but even
those who went into business, or embarked on professional
courses, remained, at heart, bnei Torah, or those who
appreciate the value of Torah. Relatively, there were no more
kippah discarders then than there are today."
The writer cites a penetrating question asked by Rabbi Tzvi
Shimshoni, in Hatzofeh, in light of the yeshiva high
school's new policy of hiring ramim with a military
past, and an academic education, a question which until now
had no answer.
"Even if the ram is a talmid chochom and very
learned, who can guarantee that the student will identify
precisely with his Torah and scholarly side? After all,
there are additional aspects to his personality (which he
also goes to pains to stress). Not every student is capable
of being as successful as his mentor in all areas. So what
must we do if a student chooses to identify with only one
aspect of his mentor's character, the aspect which suits him,
and which may not always be the mentor's Torah side? What
happens when the ram isn't really a talmid
chochom?
"I wonder if anyone can say with certainty today that all of
the ramim in all of the yeshiva high schools are
talmidei chachomim. Sadly, it seems to me, that over
the years, quite a few roshei yeshiva were forced to
hire ramim, who were not outstanding talmidei
chachomim, as long as they suited the spirit of the
yeshiva high-school.
The writer adds that the main aspect of the problem was and
will always be the yetzer hora. Today, the yetzer
hora has many more opportunities and means than it did in
the past, and lurks in every nook and cranny.
"But that's a technical matter, not an essential one. The
good counsel of Chazal, `pull him to the beis
medrash' is applicable today too. One must make certain,
though, that the beis medrash will be sufficiently
attractive and interesting, and that there will be someone
who wants to and can direct students to it, and along its
path."
He concludes, in his style, of course that: "In the end, the
cracking of a sugya along with Kezos, Nesivos
and a few Avnei Milu'im, and a good svoro of
Reb Chaim are interesting and exciting intellectual
challenges, just as they were 20 or 30 years ago. One who
spouts them can still merit a high rating among his pals. The
question is: do we have enough super- professional moderators
who will serve these delicacies to our youngsters?
"When Torah study resumes a central place of honor in life,
and occupies most of the time and the thoughts of our
students, then the spare time, the Shabbosim, the vacations
and the conversations, and even the thoughts will appear
different."
As a side remark, we add that the hybrid approach of the
yeshiva tichoniyot negates, in its essence, the aspiration to
inculcate Torah as a supreme value. But the writer is right
when he says that in the past the chareidi ramim knew
how to instill sensitive and talented students, who found
themselves in such institutions, with the cheshek to
study and to create a more Torah-oriented atmosphere.
Sadly, the administrations of the yeshiva tichoniyot not only
purged the yeshiva high schools of yeshivishe ramim,
but also of all yeshivishe aspirations.
