What is Dvekut in Torah study?
Hello Rabbi Michael,
I started listening to your series of lessons on the subject of ‘Torah study’ (very interesting) and there it seems that your conclusion (which is also shared by Rabbi Chaim of Volazin and the author of the Tanya) is that in fact studying Torah there is an intellectual attachment to the will of God, which is in fact an attachment to God Himself. Therefore, every time one gains some understanding of Halacha (which is in fact the actual will that God has commanded us in the world), it actually brings another level of intellectual attachment to God. This is in contrast to Hasidism, for example, which believed that Torah is only one of the means to reach attachment through emotion.
So much for summarizing the words according to how I understood them from you (I would be happy if you would comment if I was not precise). But my question is what exactly does it mean that someone is indeed attached to God? What does this express? Is he more enlightened, more subject to spiritual insights and intuitions, closer to something that is true? Is there some empirical way to see that someone is indeed attached to God after studying Gemara in detail compared to someone else? And if somehow there is such a way, is there also a way to show that it is done specifically with a certain study method? (Perhaps Dehilekta like the Chazo”a, the method of understanding like Brisk, Telz and other Lithuanian yeshivot, etc., or even to see that Talmudic study has priority over study of a different nature such as Aggadah/Mosheva or Tanakh, etc.).
Or is it some kind of metaphysical/mystical “halot” whose results we will only see in the next world, etc., and there is no way to see/feel it in our world.
I feel like I’m a little unclear about this concept, and I’d love to hear how you understood it.
I hope I phrased the question well, I would love to hear your feedback.
Discover more from הרב מיכאל אברהם
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
I don’t think this has any practical implications. It’s a definition of the situation (not necessarily a condition). Being in such a situation is not a means to something else but an end in itself. The explanation there brings the Rosh that Torah study is done for its own sake, for the sake of the Torah. Study is an end in itself and not a means.
I don’t think it should depend on the teaching method, but from my understanding, it seems that exploration is more than familiarity. Deepening and discovering ways of thinking seems like a deeper and more fundamental connection to the ways of God. You can see here on the website the series of columns on representation (379 onwards) where I explained this in more detail.
Discover more from הרב מיכאל אברהם
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
And so in the series on poetry (107 onwards), at the end of which I returned to explain why the Torah is called poetry, this in theoretical study in particular (column 113).
Thank you very much for the answer
But of course I didn't mean that learning is a means to something, but also when learning is for the sake of the Torah, which is the Dvekut in G-d, how do I know that I am indeed in this situation? Or alternatively, where can I even point out that there is such a thing as Dvekut at all, and that it is done through Torah study.
But you answered that there are no practical expressions for this, so how did you come to the conclusion in the first place that there is a Dvekut that is achieved through Torah study? Did you come to this conclusion only through studying the thought of the Achronot (such as Nefa'ach and Baal Tanya)? Or is there another indirect way to reach this conclusion (intuitions and rational reasoning of the mind, for example)?
You didn't understand. If there is no goal that learning is intended to achieve, this means that adherence is not a state created by learning. Learning is adherence. So what do you want to see as an indication that you are attached? If you are learning, you are attached, because He and His will are one. When you are learning, His will is in you and you are engaged in it. As I wrote to you, you don't need to reach mysticism or ecstasy. The state of learning is by definition a state of adherence to God Almighty. It's like telling you that I know that it is day now, and you ask me how I know that it is day now. Maybe I can give you some reasoning, in any case it is a question that makes sense. But if you ask how you know that you know that it is day now, it is a question that doesn't make sense. Knowledge is a state in itself and if I know, there is no need and there are no indications that I know.
Another question, do you think that for the matter of adherence as you described, one also needs to identify with the Torah being studied (i.e., the will of God), or is simply knowing and understanding the depth of the Halacha already complete adherence, even if it feels very disconnected from the learner.
I don't know. It's likely that the mere study is enough, since it's not about mental devotion, but rather a state of learning that is itself devotion.
Leave a Reply
Please login or Register to submit your answer
