Three Students — Three Directions in the Path of Rabbi Kook, of blessed memory

Originally published: May 12, 2026

This is an English translation (via GPT-5.4). Read the original Hebrew version.

Article Content

Three Students — Three Directions in the Path of Rabbi Kook, of blessed memory – Srugim

Ninety years after his passing, the question of Rabbi Kook’s path is not merely historical, but also relevant to the identity questions of Religious Zionism today. In the movement ‘The Third Path – Torah with Worldly Engagement’ we are occasionally asked to what extent, and whether at all, this movement is connected to his path. This is an interesting question, and I would like to address it briefly here.

Rabbi Avraham Yitzhak HaCohen Kook was a complex and unique figure: ultra-Orthodox by any reasonable definition — in his dress, in Jewish law, and in his fidelity to tradition — and at the same time the thinker who laid the foundations for the contemporary Religious-Zionist camp. He knew how to hold together ultra-Orthodoxy and deep conservatism with love for the people and for the Zionist enterprise, openness to art and science, and a broad redemptive outlook.

Three Students — Three Directions

Rabbi Kook had three central students: his son, Rabbi Tzvi Yehuda; Rabbi Yaakov Moshe Charlap; and Rabbi David Cohen — ‘the Nazir.’ Each carried forward a different line:

Rabbi Tzvi Yehuda emphasized the national-redemptive process, which sees Zionism as a divine expression of a deterministic process of redemption. His teaching nourishes not only the nationalist ultra-Orthodox ‘Kav’ yeshivot, but also many of the hesder yeshivot and pre-military academies. This conception of religious nationalism is a broad mainstream within Religious Zionism, one that does not detach itself from its more extreme representatives (what are called the ‘Kav yeshivot’). Rabbi Charlap expressed a more ‘ultra-Orthodox’ approach: open to Zionism, but without attributing essential sanctity to the state. From this approach grew, among others, Rabbi Yehuda Amital and his students, and even ultra-Orthodox rabbis such as Rabbi Elyashiv and Rabbi Shlomo Zalman Auerbach. The Nazir emphasized the intellectual, philosophical, and mystical side, and his students, who do not constitute an identifiable group, are found mainly in academic and ideological discourse. In a certain sense, all three reflect genuine aspects that all existed within Rabbi Kook himself.

Innovation and Tradition

In the more extreme part of the stream that follows Rabbi Tzvi Yehuda’s path, there is often a tendency to criticize others for lacking a ‘pedigree.’ One hears rhetorical questions such as: On whom do you rely? Under which Torah scholar did you study? This despite the fact that it is precisely there that one finds considerable religious innovation that clearly departs from the mainstream of Jewish tradition throughout the generations (let me note that many of the leading sages of Rabbi Kook’s generation disagreed with him and even criticized him harshly). I once saw a striking expression of this in a memorial volume for Rabbi Ra’anan, where, in the section dealing with ancient manuscripts (as is customary in this genre of books), there appeared illustrations that gave the impression that the chain of Torah transmission passed from Moses our Teacher to Rabbi Kook, from him to his son and to Rabbi Charlap, while ignoring everything in between. The phenomenon recalls what happens in the Brisk school: there too, a very new method of study and of conduct in Jewish law took shape, yet the outward rhetoric extols tradition and stability. At times it seems that this is a mechanism of projection — one whose path is innovative tends to accuse others of innovation, thereby conveying (also to himself) that he is the authentic continuer of the whole tradition.

The Third Path and Rabbi Kook’s Path

The movement ‘The Third Path – Torah with Worldly Engagement’ does not follow the path of Rabbi Tzvi Yehuda’s students, at least not in their nationalist ultra-Orthodox sense. But as we have seen, this is not the only possible continuation of him. The movement certainly draws from Rabbi Kook’s spirit: openness, moral responsibility, a serious attitude toward the world and toward science, a connection to art and culture, and commitment to the state and to Zionism. All this without placing these matters on a mystical foundation. Our connection to the state and to modernity is based first and foremost on civic and moral responsibility. Members of the movement may choose to ground this also in metaphysical conceptions, but there is no necessity for that. This is a model that allows modern ultra-Orthodox Jews and Religious Zionists who are not nationalist ultra-Orthodox to meet around shared moral and social principles. We do not claim to follow Rabbi Kook’s path exactly, but it is certainly not correct to say that we do not follow his path. Those who identify with the two other approaches that continued him — the open ultra-Orthodox one or the intellectual-academic one — can, and are invited to, find a place with us as well. The Third Path does not seek to narrow, but to widen the circle. On the third of Elul this year, we seek to continue connecting commitment to tradition with openness to the world in all its dimensions, and of course also with civic and moral commitment to the living and vibrant State of Israel.

______

Rabbi Michael Abraham is chairman of the ‘Third Path’ movement and a lecturer at the Institute for Advanced Torah Studies at Bar-Ilan University

Source (Srugim): https://www.srugim.co.il/1231842-%d7%a9%d7%9c%d7%95%d7%a9%d7%94-%d7%aa%d7%9c%d7%9e%d7%99%d7%93%d7%99%d7%9d-%d7%a9%d7%9c%d7%95%d7%a9%d7%94-%d7%9b%d7%99%d7%95%d7%95%d7%a0%d7%99%d7%9d-%d7%91%d7%93%d7%a8%d7%9b%d7%95-%d7%a9%d7%9c-%d7%94%d7%a8%d7%91-%d7%a7%d7%95%d7%a7-%d7%96%d7%a6%d7%9c

Article Content

שתף

Leave a ReplyCancel reply