|
|
| |||||
|
IN-DEPTH FEATURES
Part Two: Along the Pathways of the
PaRDeS
For Shavuos, this exploration of the Gaon's teachings
about Torah, to help us appreciate the wonderful gift that
Hashem gave us.
Multiple Levels
The Vilna Gaon taught that the Oral Torah is not merely an
interpretation of the Written Torah, onto which it is
superimposed in order to provide explanation as a
transparency is placed over the bare outline of a picture to
provide further depth and detail. He showed how Torah
Shebe'al Peh is a direct outgrowth of the Written Torah.
The spelling and sequence of the words and pesukim of
the Written Torah are replete with allusions to the laws
contained in the Mishnah, the synopsis of the Oral
Torah. The Gaon maintained that the application of a
comparable process of inference to the text of the Mishnah
forms the basis of the gemora's discussions, which
basically elaborate the Mishnah.
The Gaon went yet further and asserted that the levels of
both pshat, the text's simple meaning, and
drush, the meaning yielded by the orally transmitted
methods of expounding the text, are valid in the study of the
Mishnah as well as in the study of the Written Torah.
Thus, the gemora's understanding of a mishnah
may differ from that obtained by a simple reading, but
application of the methods of drush will show that it
is alluded to in the text. It is also legitimate to interpret
a mishnah according to its plain meaning, even when
the gemora understands it differently.
This is the testimony of the Gaon's talmidim Rav
Binyomin Rivlin zt'l (in his work Gevi'i Gevia
Hakesef, explaining the mishnah in Bovo Kama
14) and Rav Menasheh of Iliya (in the introduction to his
work Binas Mikro). The Reshash (on Pesochim 74)
also refers to this having been the Gaon's practice (in
explaining the mishnah in Brochos 7:2). He
quotes the Tosafos Yom Tov (Nozir 5:5) who writes that
it is quite acceptable to advance alternative explanations of
mishnayos to those of Chazal in the gemora.
This, he notes, is the established tradition of the
commentators to the Written Torah. The only condition is that
they should not result in interpreting any laws in
contradiction to the opinions of the Sages of the Talmud.
Depth Within Depth, Meaning Within
Meaning
At the end of Margoliyos Hatorah on NaCh and
the Five Megillos, written by the Gaon's talmid
Rav Tzvi Hirsch zt'l of Semiatitz, the copier, Rav
Mordechai son of Rav Nechemia zt'l, writes: "Each
strand of this threefold cord [i.e. the Written Torah, the
Oral Torah and the concealed Torah teachings] can be
interpreted according to pshat [simple meaning],
remez [allusion], drush [expounding] and
sod [secret teachings]: Scripture, Mishnah and
Talmud.
"Even regarding the holy Zohar and the writings of the
Arizal, I heard from Rav Aryeh Leib -- who heard from his
father the Gaon -- that it contains pshat, remez,
drush and sod. These are secrets within
secrets."
Rav Chaim Berlin zt'l, is also mentioned (in Olom
Asiyah on Tanach, on pp. 29 and 82) as having
repeated this in the Gaon's name.
Pshat and drush often yield clearly differing
interpretations of the same text -- which are nevertheless
both valid. The text carries more than one meaning and the
different methods of interpretation complement rather than
contradict one another. Pshat and sod, on the
other hand, never differ. They are simply differing aspects,
or levels of the selfsame teaching.
The Gaon's comments about the aggodoh -- the homiletic
passages of Shas where Chazal impart mussar and
other non-halachic teachings -- help explain this idea. In
his commentary to Mishlei, the Gaon explains that the
aggodos are the means by which Chazal convey the Torah
secrets that are "Hashem's glory" (25:2) and asserts that
"all the Torah's secret teachings are secreted within them"
(24:30).
However, they are not mere allegory. Elsewhere the Gaon
writes, "everything is true in the plainest sense but they
also contain inner meaning -- not the inner meaning of the
scholars of philosophy, which relegates it to the rubbish
heap but that of the scholars of truth" (Yoreh Dei'ah
179:13).
He also wrote: "This is the wonderful virtue of the Divine
Torah over all other works on other branches of knowledge and
ethics that are written in parable or riddle form . . .this
Torah -- both its outer and inner aspects -- is all true and
precise. This is something wondrous, that is relevant to
nothing else save the capacity of Divine wisdom" (Likkutei
HaGra from manuscript, Mishlei 1:6).
Fidelity of the Simple Meaning and Concealed
Teachings
Several observations on the Gaon's approach, made by his
talmidim and by later gedolim, enhance our
understanding of this relationship between pshat and
sod. Rav Mendel of Shklov writes, "I shall state
clearly that which I heard explicitly from his holy lips. He
never explained any posuk unless he knew its hidden
meaning and clothed it in the plain meaning."
Rav Mendel explains that this formed the basis of his
arrangement of the Gaon's commentary to Mishlei.
"Although there are a number of pesukim that at first
glance seem simple, I have not omitted them. They seem simple
but [in reality] are ladders reaching from the ground to the
heavens, as the wise [reader] will understand" (Introduction
to the Gaon's commentary on Mishlei).
Rav Mendel's colleague, Rav Yisroel of Shklov writes: "All
his ideas about understanding revealed Torah were firmly
bound to the chain of kabboloh, no secret of which
escaped him, as I heard from my beloved friend . . .Rav
Mendel . . . who heard from his holy lips when he received
his commentary to seder Taharos, that he did not
resolve upon any underlying principle or explanation that he
developed in seder Taharos until he knew its inner
essence according to the concealed Torah" (Introduction to
Taklin Chadetin).
Rav Yaakov Tzvi Mecklenburg zt'l, author of Hakesav
Vehakabboloh, expressed this idea very succinctly. "They
attest in the name of our great teacher the Gaon, who said
that the order of a person's study should be from the bottom
upwards [i.e. from a simpler level of understanding to a
deeper and more elevated one] while his attainment [i.e.
comprehension] should guide him from the top downwards. When
he understands the concealed meaning properly, he will
understand everything properly, pshat, remez, drush
and sod. So long as one doesn't understand the
sod, even the pshat is unclear" (from his work
Iyun tefilloh, section on Shabbos shacharis, on
the words luchos avonim).
A pivotal aspect of the Gaon's central idea of Torah's unity
is the harmony that exists between the revealed Torah and the
kabboloh, both of which issue from the same Divine
Source and both of which are rooted in the Written Torah.
There were those who pointed to laws over which the Sages of
the revealed Torah disagreed with those of the
kabboloh as evidence of two distinct approaches. The
Gaon would say that these people only "discovered" these
"contradictions" because they did not understand how to
explain the Zohar properly "for how could the holy
Torah's concealed approach argue with its revealed approach?"
(Rav Chaim of Volozhin quoting the Gaon, in the Introduction
to the Gaon's commentary to the Zohar).
The Parallel between Revealed Torah and
Concealed Torah
In the Gaon's view, the body of written kabboloh that
we possess today and the relationship to one another of the
various works that comprise it, parallels the arrangement of
the Oral Torah. The first scholars of kabboloh set
down all the teachings that had been received at Har
Sinai in Safra Detseni'uso. Rabbi Shimon bar
Yochai then came and provided elucidation of that work,
revealing further secrets in the holy Zohar. However,
there is nothing in the Zohar, the Tikkunim and
the Idros that is not alluded to in Safra
Detseni'uso.
Later came the Arizal who revealed yet more secrets that were
nonetheless all hinted at already in the existing
seforim. He clarified and expanded the very same
teachings that had been presented in the Zohar. His
teachings were set out in an orderly manner in a number of
sections (the Shemoneh She'orim) including the Eitz
Chaim, which his talmidim produced.
The Gaon's approach to the various kabboloh works is
clearly and beautifully presented by Rav Chaim of Volozhin in
his introduction to the Gaon's commentary to Safra
Detseni'uso. Rav Chaim begins by reviewing his rebbe's
colossal achievements in tracing the roots of the Shulchan
Oruch.
"In his holy written works, he trod and illumined a new and
holy path for us, which nobody had traversed for several
generations before him. It is a firm and clear path through
[both] revealed and concealed [Torah]. We shall take this
path upwards, climbing ever higher, discovering the sources,
and the sources of the sources for the laws.
"He performed a wondrous feat in his commentary on
Shulchan Oruch, where he encompassed the multitude of
laws mentioned in the holy writings according to their
sources in the two Talmudim, which he pointed out. He
finely examined and sifted [the rulings] until he produced a
pure and lucid extract of the opinions of the Rishonim
z'l.
"And also in his commentary to the Mishnah, he
encompassed all the teachings of the Amoraim in the
two Talmudim and [also showed how] all the Toseftos
and Beraissos are clearly alluded to in the
Mishnah.
"In the same way, this commentary on Safra Detseni'uso
is an awe inspiring achievement, in which he reveals his
tremendous power. He demonstrates how all the procedures of
creation and of [Yechezkel's] vision of the Divine
Merkovoh that are set out in the holy Zohar,
the Idros, the Tikkunim and the writings of
the Arizal -- their general principles and [also] their
details -- are contained and arranged according to their
order and rules in the source of sources, this elevated and
holy volume, Safra Detseni'uso."
Not only did the Gaon trace the roots of the entire contents
of the later works of kabboloh to Safra
Detseni'uso, he also clearly showed how they are all
contained within the Written Torah.
Rav Chaim continues: "He went even further, with a grand idea
which he arrived at through his toil. There is nothing in the
teachings of the holy Zohar, the Tikkunim and
the Ra'aya Mehemena, that is not alluded to in the
Written Torah. There are heaps and heaps of the deepest
secrets [alluded to] by each and every stroke [of the Torah's
letters]."
Rav Chaim stresses that it was not merely the Gaon's
brilliance that enabled him to comprehend all this but the
sheer hard work that he invested. "This had always been his
holy practice -- to understand, to contemplate and to engage
in unimaginably great and mighty labors that one would grow
tired from describing. With tremendous and wondrous
attachment, in abundant holiness and wondrous purity, to the
point where he merited understanding them thoroughly and how
they were all clearly and genuinely present in their source
and in the ultimate, original source."
Delve into It Unceasingly for It Contains
Everything
Towards the end of the Gaon's life, his utter mastery of
Torah and ability to pinpoint the source of each and every
one of Chazal's teachings in the Written Torah, led him to
reverse the usual order of Torah study and wholly devote
himself to reviewing the Oral Torah from the Written
Torah, by scrutinizing its letters, words and language --
a far more elevated level of study than learning the Oral
Torah separately.
The younger brother of Rav Refoel Hacohen of Hamburg served
as rov of the town of Chutatz and when Rav Refoel was
elderly, he stayed with him for some time. Rav Refoel once
mentioned the Gaon's name in the course of conversation and
his brother noticed a reverential shudder pass through him as
he did so. He asked Rav Refoel in what way the Vilna Gaon had
been greater than the other geonim of his day to
elicit such respect.
Rav Refoel's sight was dim due to old age and he asked his
brother to go to the bookcase and bring him a certain
sefer whose position he described, without specifying
what sefer it was. His brother fetched the book he
wanted; it was a Tanach.
"The Gaon was fluent in this sefer," Rav Refoel
exclaimed excitedly and went on to explain how the Gaon had
known where all the contents of the Talmud and the other
parts of the Oral Torah were secreted within Tanach
(Aliyos Eliyahu, in the introduction Ma'alos
Hasulam, note 11, from the records of the Radal, who
heard it himself from Rav Refoel's brother).
Rav Yisroel of Shklov adds that the Gaon also knew where all
the books of Nevi'im and Kesuvim are alluded to
in the five Chumoshim (Introduction to Pe'as
Hashulchan, quoting Rav Mendel of Shklov who heard this
from the Gaon).
The Gaon also found allusions to Chazal's teachings in the
trop, the tunes to which the Torah is read which are
assigned by tradition to each word. A number of explanations
of pesukim and of statements by Chazal based on the
trop and the names of the different tunes are quoted
from the Gaon (see for example Peninim Mishulchan HaGra,
Bereishis 44:18; Shemos 1:14; 30:12, 14; 33:4-5; Vayikra
11:41; 25:46; Bamidbor 31:50; Devorim 14:22; 15:8 and see
also Shaarei Zohar, Nedorim 37, who gathers
explanations of the names of all the tunes from the
Zohar).
Rav Shaul Katzenellenbogen zt'l, who was av beis
Din of Vilna and a frequent visitor to the Gaon's home in
his final years, related that in his last years, the Gaon
learned mainly from a Chumash, contemplating its words
as a route to studying the Oral Torah to which they alluded
(Aliyos Eliyahu ibid. Rav Y.H. Levin zt'l,
quoting his father Rav E. Z. Levin zt'l, who heard
this from Rav Shaul).
Another source attests that this was the Gaon's practice
during the last three years of his life and notes that it was
also the practice of the Sha'agas Aryeh zt'l (Toldos
Yitzchok by Rav Yitzchok Cahana zt'l, a
talmid of Rav Y. I. Chover zt'l, Yerushalayim
5637, pg. 10).
Joining the Oral Torah to the Written
Torah
In his introduction to Zichru Toras Moshe, the Gaon's
mechuton, the Chayei Odom writes, "He learned the way
we were commanded to learn by Moshe Rabbenu . . . He would
learn the Written Torah together with its orally transmitted
explanation using his knowledge of how to expound each letter
and its vowels, as is apparent from his work on the Torah.
All this goes for the revealed part of Torah. And he was even
wiser in the concealed part, to the extent that if all the
seas were ink etc. it would not suffice to explain his words.
Everything he said was in the form of allusions, that require
lengthy explanation."
Study of the Gaon's commentary to Tikkunei Zohar
reveals that this practice was not a mere system or a
particular kind of approach to learning but a definite form
of avodas Hashem (beyond the actual mitzvah of
learning Torah) and a way of rectifying the spiritual
worlds.
The Gaon maintains that there are two ways of bringing about
this rectification through learning the Oral Torah: "One is
by determining which view to follow where opinions differ and
the other is by connecting it to the Written Torah"
(Tikkun Twenty-One, Vilna ed. p. 46a, col. 1. Thanks
to my friend Rav Nosson Tzvi Finkel who brought this source
to my attention.). See also the text boxes that accompany
this article.
Referring to the Gaon's practice of determining the sources
for Chazal's teachings in the Written Torah, Rav Tzvi Hirsch
Farber zt'l of London concludes: "Every man of heart
can see from this that the Torah is Hashem's writing, for it
is impossible for flesh and blood to allude in a small volume
to worlds of infinity" (Kerem Hatzevi, Devorim pg.
159)
Six Hundred and Thirteen Roots
As well as showing how the Written Torah serves as the source
of all the Oral Torah, both revealed and concealed on all
levels, the Gaon astounds us with a further revelation. In
his work Ma'alos Hatorah, the Gaon's brother Rav
Avrohom zt'l writes:
"When the number six hundred and thirteen [mitzvos] is
mentioned, this refers only to the number of roots but these
proliferate into many [more] branches. In truth, knowing
which are roots and which are branches is beyond our
understanding. But we do not need to know anyway because the
entire Torah and all the mitzvos -- the principles, details
and fine points thereof -- are contained within every
individual mitzvah and within every word of Torah,.
"This is why the Torah is compared to a tree -- `It is a tree
of life . . .' (Mishlei 3:18) -- because a tree
branches out from a single root into a number of boughs. Each
bough has several branches and each branch bears several
fruits. Within each fruit are a number of seeds, each of
which has the power to grow into another whole tree. In
addition, each bough can be replanted and will grow into a
whole, complete tree. So it is with the Torah and its
mitzvos. Each individual word and mitzvah contains all the
mitzvos and all the words."
In other words, not only does the Torah as a whole allude to
and contain entire worlds of meaning but each and every word
and mitzvah also contain within them all the other
mitzvos.
Rav Aharon Kotler zt'l, used this idea to explain a
comment that is repeated in the Gaon's name. The Gaon was of
the opinion that there is no reason to don Rabbenu Tam
tefillin since the halochoh follows the opinion of
Rashi, the Rambam and the other poskim who disagree
with him.
The Gaon once remarked that when he reached the Upper World,
he would go over to Rabbenu Tam and spend three days
disproving his opinion to him. (Although the time of "three
days" is not mentioned in the usual version of the story
which is brought in Rav Chaim of Volozhin's Kesser
Rosh and in other sources, it appears in Beis
Yaakov by Rav Boruch Broide of Kelm [Yerushalayim 5644]
where a handwritten account of Rav Yisroel of Shklov is
quoted: "I heard from his talmid [Rav Chaim] that our
teacher used to say that he had questions on Rabbenu Tam's
opinion which he would ask him for three days in the World to
Come . . ." See the Gaon's commentary to Tikkunei Zohar
Chodosh, Avodoh Zora 77 regarding the support for Rabbenu
Tam's tefillin that is cited from the
Zohar.)
Reb Aharon expressed his amazement over what there could be
to spend three days discussing. The entire topic occupies no
more than one line of gemora in maseches
Menochos, which is explained one way by Rashi and another
way by Rabbenu Tam. What was the Gaon referring to that could
occupy him for three days?
Moreover, in his commentary to Shulchan Oruch which he
wrote for general study, the Gaon's comments are extremely
concise. If that is how he saw fit to express himself for the
general public, one imagines that his communication with
Rabbenu Tam would be all the more brief. What would take
three entire days?
It is said in the Gaon's name and also mentioned in
Ma'alos Hatorah, Reb Aharon explained, that each word
in the Torah has branches and sub-branches yet is also
connected to all of the rest of the Torah. When refuting
Rabbenu Tam's opinion about tefillin then, the Gaon
will certainly show how his arguments are reflected in each
of the Torah's other mitzvos. Given the Gaon's fearsome and
exalted power, Reb Aharon concluded, such a lengthy discourse
could easily take three days (from Rav Yisroel Spinner, who
heard this from Reb Aharon himself).
Discerning the Full Detail
Quoting the Gaon, his brother writes further in Ma'alos
Hatorah, "In truth, the mitzvos abound tremendously and
cannot be numbered. Any person who has a penetrating
intellect and an understanding heart and can conduct himself
in all his affairs and in every respect, big and small,
according to the Torah's mitzvos, will be fulfilling mitzvos
at every moment. The gemora and the midroshim
contain many such accounts about how the Sages z'l,
conducted themselves according to the Torah in every
respect."
This idea of the Gaon's forms the basis of the sefer Eved
Hamelech on the Torah by Rav Shmuel Houminer zt'l.
On the title page the author writes that he sets out "to
explain all Hashem's mitzvos . . . both those numbered among
the 613 and those that are not . . . everything that Chazal
learned from pesukim in Tanach that we ought to do or
ought to refrain from doing . . ." (See also the introduction
and the letter of haskomoh from Rav Isser Zalman
Meltzer zt'l).
For his part, the author of Ma'alos Hatorah succeeded
in enumerating two lots of six hundred and thirteen ways of
the world which he gathered from the gemora, midroshim
and Yalkut that are alluded to in the Torah from
parshas Bereishis to parshas Noach (as his
descendant Rav Meir ben Eliyohu testifies in Milchamos
Hashem [in manuscript]).
End of Part 2 of 3
Rav Zelmele of Volozhin zt'l, who, with his brother
Rav Chaim, was the Gaon's closest talmid, followed his
teacher in seeking the Scriptural sources for halachos
in the Oral Torah where these were not identified by earlier
works. Some were apparent from the simple meaning; others
depended on hints or allusions but all were straightforward
and firmly based.
Rav Zelmele once remarked that when he studied Tanach
as a youngster, he knew for sure that it contained wonderful
things but on the whole it was a closed book to him. When he
studied Written Torah again however, after having learned
Shas, both Bavli and Yerushalmi, as well
as the rest of the Oral Torah, he found much that was new and
that made good sense. Chazal's teachings had opened the way
for him to appreciate the light of the Written Torah.
Henceforth, he used pesukim to help him remember the
Oral Torah, because multitudes of halochos hung upon
every nuance of their terse language. Sometimes, he was able
to memorize a hundred halachos or more, through one,
short parsha (Toldos Odom, perek 4).
In his introduction to his commentary on Chumash, the
Rokei'ach writes, "The Talmud issues from the Torah.
It requires great depth, understanding and comprehension to
see how it does so . . . for the Talmud extends to over a
thousand seforim, with the Oral Torah, the debates and
the close study of the mitzvos and laws, what is permitted
and forbidden -- and it all issues from the Written Torah.
Torah study is thus equal to all else, for `Is there anything
that Moshe did not allude to in the Torah?' etc."
A wonderful passage in the Or Hachaim's commentary to
the Chumash (Vayikra 13:37) sheds light on the Gaon's
understanding of the relationship between the Written and the
Oral Torah.
"The Master, Boruch Hu, in His wisdom . . . inscribed
in the Written Torah all the Oral Torah that He told Moshe,
but He didn't inform Moshe where everything that He'd told
him orally was alluded to in writing. This is the work of
bnei Yisroel, who toil in Torah: to reconcile the
halachos that were told to Moshe at Sinai, and the
secrets and droshos and find them all a place in the
Written Torah. Thus, one finds that the Tanoim came
and composed Toras Cohanim and the Sifrei etc.
All of their expounding of the Scriptures correspond to the
halachos, which they clothed in [Scriptural sources
within] Hashem's perfect Written Torah.
"Following them, to this day, this is the holy work of
bnei Torah -- to scrutinize the pesukim and
reconcile them with the statements in the Oral Torah . . .
This task was not conveyed to Moshe in its entirety . . .
This is why they z'l, said that Rabbi Akiva was
expounding droshos that Moshe did not know. This does
not mean that he didn't know the actual teachings - - after
all, everything comes from him, `even what experienced
scholars are going to derive' -- just that he didn't know
they are supported and precisely alluded to in the Torah"
(Thanks to my brother, Rav Avrohom Yeshaya for bringing this
source to my attention).
In his sefer, Revid Hazohov, Rav Dov Ber Treves
zt'l, one of the greatest Torah scholars in Vilna in
the Gaon's time, discovered the sources in the Written Torah
for numerous laws. Rav Tzvi Hirsch of Semiatitz zt'l,
a talmid of Rav Chaim of Volozhin, did the same for
the concealed Torah. In his sefer, Margoliyos Hatorah,
he cites the teachings of the Arizal and of other
mekubolim, showing their sources in pesukim.
Another of Rav Chaim's talmidim, Rav Eliyahu Ragoler
zt'l, writes in a letter to his son-in-law, "Learn a
fixed, daily shiur of Chumash with Rashi,
according to the plain meaning, without any of the
commentaries on Rashi whatsoever . . . review the
shiur five times. Really, the main purpose in learning
is [achieved] through fluency in the Written Torah, for this
enables one to remember Chazal's midroshim in
Shas . . . For Hashem's sake, do not swerve from this
path, for this is the main foundation of Torah. Happy is the
man who learns Chumash and the posuk,
`Bereishis' at the beginning of his learning, before he
reaches the stage of gemora."
The Netziv zt'l was another outstanding follower of
this approach, which is the main thrust of all his writings.
All his comments in Ha'ameik Dovor, his great
commentary to Chumash, revolve around the teachings of
the Talmudim and midroshim and their
relationship to the pesukim. Moreover, in numerous
places, the Netziv demonstrates from pesukim the great
merit that the Written Torah itself attaches to the study of
the Oral Torah.
He writes that his commentary elucidates, "the profundity of
the plain meaning, interwoven with Chazal's teachings. . .
Moreover, when one truly appreciates the power of the Talmud
and its study and what it achieves for Yisroel [as will
happen] when one arrives at the parsha, `Kadeish li kol
bechor' (Shemos 13:1- 10) and with a virtual majority of
the parshos in sefer Devorim, where I show
(10:8) that scripture refers to Talmud as
"Aron Beris Hashem" because it is the means through
which Hashem's Providence is bestowed upon Yisroel . . ."
(from a letter to the savant Avrohom Eliyahu Harkavy, 12th
Teves 5641, printed in Shenos Dor Vodor by Rav
Reuven Dov Dessler, Yerushalayim, 5760, pg. 183).
| ||||
| All material
on this site is copyrighted and its use is restricted. |
|||||