|
|
| |||
|
IN-DEPTH FEATURES
The following is translated and adapted from the
monumental three-volume work HaGaon by Rav Dov Eliach.
It is taken from the second volume, chapter 21, entitled,
"Toras Hashem Temimoh."
"Who can count, who can measure,
The bounds of his heart's breadth?
His novel Torah insights are endless,
Into Hashem's perfect Torah,
All as clean as fine meal,
As it was given at Sinai,
Would that they be engraved in a book."
-- from an introduction by the sons of the Gra to a volume
containing their father's Bi'ur al Kammoh Aggodos,
Vilna, 5560 (1800)
Whole and Perfect
Becoming acquainted with the vast corpus of the Gaon's Torah
writings is a very revealing experience, which transforms
one's understanding both of Torah's Heavenly origin and of
what `knowing Torah' can actually mean. A single aspect of
the Gaon's Torah touches upon both these ideas -- its
revelation of Torah as a single, integrated whole.
`Torah's wholeness' is the key to appreciating the Gaon's
method of laboring at Torah study. The term means complete,
deep, thorough, orderly and lucid knowledge of the entire
Torah.
It means fully fathoming the significance of every word,
every vowel, every pause and every trop, so that all
are consistent with both the plain meaning and the rules of
grammar.
Torah's wholeness, as reflected in the Gaon's writings,
demonstrates that "Hashem's Torah is perfect" (Tehillim
19:8). From every one of Torah's branches, subdivisions
and details, it becomes apparent that all Torah comprises
one, perfect unit containing multiple layers of meaning and
interpretation that interlock and are dependent upon one
another but which are all ultimately rooted in the source of
sources, the Written Torah.
Torah's perfection is apparent from the Oral Torah's being
secreted within the Written Torah. In the Oral Torah itself,
all the writings of the poskim are contained within
the words of Chazal in the two Talmudim. Everything in
the Talmud derives from scrutiny of the concise
language of the Mishnah, while the contents of the
Mishnah itself are derived through the established
methods of expounding the words and pesukim of the
Written Torah.
Torah's perfection also means that the revealed Torah and the
concealed Torah -- Kabboloh -- are not at variance
with one another. They both come from the same Source, with
roots in the Written Torah. Moreover, Kabboloh is
built on the same pattern and displays the same wholeness and
integrity as the revealed Torah.
A further aspect of Torah's perfection conveyed in the Gaon's
writings is the fact that it contains allusions to every
event in the world's history and to every component of
creation. This deepens our understanding of the statement
that "Yisroel, the Torah and Hakodosh Boruch Hu are
one." The Torah itself shows that this is so.
The Gaon demonstrated all this and showed the harmony and
consistency between the different levels and aspects, and how
they are all used together to explain Torah thoroughly and
accurately. To be confronted with the full splendor of the
Gaon's vast and orderly system is to grasp the force of its
testimony to Torah's Divine origin. It at once refutes all
the shameful theories that attempt to undermine the power of
the Oral Torah and the authority of the Sages in each
generation, from the Sages of the Mishnah and
Talmud, down to the most recent poskim.
The pesukim of the Written Torah not only contain
Chazal's teachings, but also an allusion to the very
existence of the Talmud. The Gaon pointed to the words
"(eish) dos lomo" (Devorim 33:2), whose
letters, when rearranged, spell "talmud" (Likutim
Midivrei HaGra at the end of Devar Eliyohu on
Iyov and Rav Yisroel MiShklov writing in Taklin
Chadetin, Shekolim perek 6, end of halochoh 5. See
also the Netziv's Ha'amek Dovor on that
posuk.)
Source of the Oral Torah
The Gaon writes, "Kabboloh [received tradition, i.e.
the methods that Chazal received for expounding the
pesukim] constitutes the connection between the two
Torahs [i.e. Written and Oral], bringing the secrets
of the orally received tradition [to bear] on Scripture. This
is why the earlier scholars occupied themselves exclusively
with expounding the pesukim, and it is the same with
the simple droshos like the Sifro and
Sifrei, which give Scriptural sources for
halochos that were transmitted orally . . . all this
belongs to the secrets of Kabboloh" (commentary to
Tikkunei Zohar, 36b, beginning De'ihu rozo).
The Gaon's son-in-law, HaRav Shraga Feivish of Dubrovna
zt'l, testified that from the time he began learning
with his father-in-law, he saw that the Gaon's sole desire
was to follow in the footsteps of the tannoim and
amoraim. Like them, he sought to determine the sources
of halochos -- either explicit or inferred from the
differences between words or from additional or missing
letters -- in the Written Torah (his introduction to the
first edition of Aderes Eliyohu).
HaRav Chaim of Volozhin zt'l, HaRav Yisroel and HaRav
Mendel of Shklov zt'l, all write that the Gaon managed
to identify the source of every statement of Chazal's in the
gemora and midroshim, "deriving heaps [of
halochos] from every pen stroke" (Rav Chaim's
introduction to Shenos Eliyohu).
Rav Yisroel points to the Gaon's treatises on Zero'im,
Kodshim and Taharos as evidence of his having
identified the sources in Scripture of each and every
mishnah. Rav Yisroel quotes from this work, which he
saw in manuscript, referring to it as "his explanations of
mishnayos hidden within Scripture" (his introduction
to Pe'as Hashulchon, quotes are in simonim 9:31
and 12:15).
This work of the Gaon's was eventually published in 5647
(1887) as Me'oros HaGra which contained "Scriptural
allusions" on nine masechtos "copied with great
precision from his own holy manuscript . . ." as the title
page notes.
The Gaon's commentary to maseches Ovos, which was
originally published by HaRav Mendel of Shklov and the Gaon's
sons, forms part of the Me'oros. It is said that at
the head of the commentary, the Gaon wrote that the name
Ovos alludes to the gemora's statement
(Shabbos 49) that "those that are written in the Torah
are called ovos" (made in connection with principles
of Shabbos -- ovos melochos).
Vivid Demonstrations
Examples of the Gaon's approach abound in his seforim
and in the records of his Torah. "He said much [on the
Scriptural sources of the Mishnah and the
gemora's source in the mishnayos] and
demonstrated it vividly," writes one of his
talmidim.
" . . . He literally had the entire Torah on his lips . . .
He counted all the words and letters in Shas, Sifro
and Tosefta, like those who possessed true knowledge
knew how to do. I will record here some of what I heard when
I was in Vilna with our teacher. He showed an allusion in the
posuk, "And you shall smash their altars" (Devorim
12:6) to the mishnah, "There are three [different
laws of] houses" in Avodoh Zora (3:7)" (Quoted in
Likutei Torah MeihaGra. The actual explanation is in
Aderes Eliyohu, Devorim 12:6 and brought in Peninim
Mishulchan HaGra in Devorim).
A rov once asked the Gaon about an emendation he had made in
Ovos DeRabbi Nosson. The original version read simply,
"Moshe was sanctified in the cloud . . . in order to receive
the Torah." The Gaon changed it to, "Moshe ascended in the
cloud and was covered in the cloud and was sanctified in the
cloud..." He explained that this was how the gemora in
Yoma (4) read and that the text of the Talmud
Bavli is reliable.
He also pointed out an allusion to this version in the
posuk: the word anan, cloud, is written ayin-
nun-nun. These are the initials of the words oloh
(he ascended), niscaseh (he was covered) and
niskadeish (he was sanctified -- introduction to
Pe'as Hashulchon in the name of Rav Saadiah, to whom
the Gaon transmitted his glosses on the minor
masechtos).
The Gaon cited an allusion in the Torah to one of the most
widespread Jewish customs. In communities all over the world,
the mention of Homon's name during the reading of Megillas
Esther triggers an outburst of banging, clapping and
other loud noises. The posuk that speaks about the
penalty of lashes contains the words vehoyo im bin hacos
horosho (it shall be, if the wicked party deserves a beating)
(Devorim 25:2). The last letters of the first three words
are hei-mem-nun which spell Homon. And the following
words are hacos horosho, meaning, "Beat the wicked
one!"
The story is told that Rav Itzele of Volozhin zt'l,
when he was approximately ten years old, accompanied his
father Rav Chaim the Gaon's close talmid on a visit to
the Gaon. Upon entering the Gaon's presence they realized
that he was preoccupied, for he was deep in thought and did
not notice that they had come in. When the Gaon gave them his
attention, Rev Chaim asked him to tell them the problem that
he had been pondering.
The Gaon replied that he had been trying to find an allusion
in the Torah to one of Chazal's teachings but it had so far
eluded him. After bnei Yisroel had crossed the Yam
Suf the Torah states: "And the sea returned . . . to its
[original] strength . . ." (Shemos 14:27). Chazal
comment that the word le'eisono, to its strength, can
also be read [if the alef and tof are
transposed] as leteno'o, meaning to its stipulation.
This teaches us that when He endowed the sea with its power
and its regular course of flow at its creation, Hakodosh
Boruch Hu stipulated with it that it should split for
bnei Yisroel. Where in the Torah did Chazal see any
allusion to such a condition?
No sooner had the Gaon finished speaking than young Itzele
asked his father to seek his rebbe's permission for him to
answer. The Gaon gave his consent and the boy began:
In parshas Bereishis (1:9) Hakodosh Boruch Hu
declares, "Let the water gather to one place and let the dry
land be visible." The last words seem superfluous. If the
waters all gather in one place, isn't it obvious that land
would be visible in those places where water had been
hitherto? Apparently then, these words are not to be
understood as a continuation of the previous phrase but as a
new, separate declaration, referring to a place that at that
time was actually covered with water but where dry land would
be visible at some later date. This, said the young Itzele,
was the Yam Suf which Hashem stipulated from the
beginning should split for bnei Yisroel.
The Gaon is said to have been highly pleased with this
answer, commenting that he was certain that Reb Itzele "would
one day be a great darshan in Yisroel" (Kol
Shachal, Vilna 5657 (1897) by Rav Shlomo Yechezkel Segal,
drush dalet. Thanks to Rav C.D. Kaplan for drawing our
attention to this source.)
The Gemora is Contained in the Mishnah
The Gaon maintained that the very same principle is
applicable to all the subsequent development of the Oral
Torah. All the discussions of the amoroim in the
gemora are essentially elucidation of the teachings of
the tannoim in the Mishnah, as arranged by
Rabbi Yehuda Hanossi. Moreover, even the Toseftos and
Beraissos are alluded to in the Mishnah.
Rabbenu Chananel writes, "The essentials of whatever appears
in the external mishnayos [i.e. Toseftos and
the like] are in our Mishnah, but not every scholar
knows how [to show this]." The gemora (Taanis 21)
itself actually mentions this idea (Rabbenu Chananel is
quoted in Chiddushei Umeoros HaGra, Yerushalayim 5759,
in the editor's introduction quoting his father, HaRav Yaakov
Chaim Sofer. HaRav Chaim Kanievsky pointed out to me that the
gemora says this.)
Rav Yisroel of Shklov also mentions the Gaon's ability to
demonstrate the mishnaic source of any Tosefta. He
relates that Rav Zelmele of Volozhin travelled to Vilna to
ask the Gaon about a single word in a mishnah with
which he was having difficulty. The Gaon showed him that that
word was an allusion to a lengthy discussion in the Tosefta.
"He was very amazed," concludes Rav Yisroel "and there were a
thousand other such instances" (introduction to Pe'as
Hashulchon. The story was told by Rav Zelmele's brother,
HaRav Chaim of Volozhin.)
HaRav Meir of Vilna, one of the Gaon's talmidim, who
published his work Eliyohu Rabbah on Taharos,
relates that when they were learning through the
mishnayos, after every perek he would read the
Toseftos that dealt with those topics upon his
rebbe's instructions, "so that I should know how the
Mishnah and the Tosefta fit together and I
should have them as one unit" (introduction to Eliyohu
Rabbah).
The Mishnah's Precision
Rabbenu Hakodosh arranged the Mishnah with such wisdom
and precision that it encompasses the Oral Torah in its
entirety. In consequence, its language is often very terse
and many extensive topics are alluded to in a few concise
words. Given its comprehensive character, how are we to
understand the gemora's frequent statement that a
mishnah is "chisurei mechsura," meaning, "the
text is missing something," which the gemora then
proceeds to supply?
The Gaon compared such mishnayos to the work of a
tailor who takes a length of material and cuts it into odd
and differently-shaped pieces. To the uninitiated observer,
some pieces seem to have extra sections and others seem to be
missing sections. The tailor however, knows that each piece
has to be exactly the way it is so that when sewn up, all the
pieces together will form a complete garment.
Rav Avrohom, the Gaon's son, writes, "I heard from my father,
the renowned gaon and pious one . . . that when Chazal
on occasion say, "It is missing and this is how it is to be
learned," nothing is really missing from the text of
the mishnah. The existence of [or the need to make]
the addition is really already evident due to the clarity of
the language of Rabbenu Hakodosh z'l. In order to make
it clearer to multitudes who merely glance at it [and are
unable to infer fully from the nuances of the language] it
has to be explained more explicitly. Whoever studies his
words will see that it [i.e. the addition] is included in the
text [perhaps] in a single extra letter" (Rav Pe'olim,
letter Reish).
Rav Yisroel of Shklov also mentions the Gaon's ability to
explain every chisurei mechsura in the gemora
in a way that showed that nothing at all was missing from the
mishnah. However he quotes the Gaon as having given a
different reason for this being so. It hinges on the approach
that Rabbenu Hakodosh followed one opinion, according to
which nothing is missing, whereas the gemora followed
a differing opinion, according to which further words have to
be inserted. The Gaon found an allusion to the chisurei
mechsura method in Shir Hashirim (7:2)
(introduction to Pe'as Hashulchon).
Discussions of the Poskim are Contained in the
Gemora
The Gaon's approach to determining halochoh was fully
consistent with his view of the Mishnah as the record
of halochos alluded to in the Written Torah and of the
gemora as the elucidation of the Mishnah. In
elucidating the rulings of the Mechaber and the glosses of
the Ramo in Shulchan Oruch, he showed how the
gemora served as their source. He viewed the decisions
and rulings of the later authorities as further development
of -- or more accurately as conclusions drawn from -- the
discussions of the gemora. He toiled and labored to
uncover the foundations of these rulings in the gemora
and pointed to them as the sources of the halochos.
Obviously, this was also the hallmark of the Gaon's own
approach to determining the halochoh: every ruling was
based upon Chazal, in the light of his understanding of the
gemora. Something for which no source could be found
in the gemora lacked foundation and could not be
upheld.
The aim of the Biur HaGra on Shulchan Oruch is
thus, "to draw attention to and to point out the source in
Shas, according to its differing opinions, when
learning Shulchan Oruch," as Rav Chaim of Volozhin put
it in his introduction to that work. Anyone who learns the
Gaon's biur properly, realizes that in citing numerous
sources he is not simply listing references but demonstrating
how to arrive at the basic building blocks of each
halochoh, whose source he had brilliantly determined.
The insight that this affords into the workings of each
halochoh facilitates the resolution of new points of
doubt that arise concerning it.
As Rav Chaim writes, "He wrought wonders in his explanation
of Shulchan Oruch, where he encompassed all the
numerous halochos that are mentioned in their holy
writings with their sources, which he demonstrated in the two
Talmudim, Bavli and Yerushalmi. He finely
ground, picked and sifted the clearest extract of all the
opinions of the Rishonim z'l" (introduction to
Safro Detseni'uso).
HaRav Shlomo Eliashiv zt'l, author of Leshem Shevo
Ve'achlomoh, once noted that truth is the Gaon's
hallmark, because in all his decisions, he always sought the
primary sources -- the Talmudim themselves -- both in
determining halochoh and in his writings on the
concealed Torah. In a letter to HaRav Naftali Hertz Halevi
zt'l, the rov of Yaffo, HaRav Eliashiv discussed the
Gaon's approach and wrote:
"Let us learn from the elders, meaning our master and teacher
the Gaon . . . who, though he achieved wondrous things,
nevertheless based himself entirely on what is written in the
Zohar and the Tikkunim. That which all the [other]
mekubolim took from the Arizal, he took from the
midroshim of Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai. This is why
everything he wrote is presented simply as explanations of
the Medrashei Rashbi. This was his holy approach in
the revealed Torah as well.
"He thus merited having the truth issue from his lips and
achieving all that he did achieve. It befits us to follow his
holy path as well, not offering any of our own conjectures
but drawing pure waters from deep wells, that are from the
words of the Rav and the Gaon only."
To be continued, be'eizer Hashem
The Gaon's talmidim once asked him why he recorded his
insights, explanations and glosses in such terse language. He
explained that the halochoh is, "You may not write
down that which is to be transmitted orally" (Gittin
60). The only reason that it was permitted to write down
the Oral Torah is that otherwise Torah would have been
forgotten. Thus, the briefer we can be in our writing the
better.
He added that this is the reason that the Mishnah is
written in such concise language. Rebbi and his fellow Sages
who arranged the Mishnah permitted the Oral Torah to
be written down in order to save Torah. But they were
extremely careful and tried to be as brief as possible. A
number of the tannoim of the Mishnah used to
make their own records of halochos as an aid to memory
but because of the prohibition against writing halochos
(Gittin ibid.), they did so in the briefest
possible way, similar to shorthand. Obviously this left
plenty of room for later Sages to seek explanations and
interpretations of these writings.
The Gaon concluded that he also tried to render his own
writing as concise as possible, recording no more than was
absolutely necessary. Writing down Oral Torah was never
permitted for any more than the minimum (introduction to
Toras Yeruchom by Rav Zeev Shachnowitz, vol. II: "I
have seen it quoted in the name of the gaon of his
generation Rav Gershon Tanchum, rov of Minsk . . .").
| ||
| All material
on this site is copyrighted and its use is restricted. |
|||