Q&A: A Question About the Attitude Toward Torah Study and Its Value
A Question About the Attitude Toward Torah Study and Its Value
Question
Is it preferable to be a kollel fellow and engage only in Torah, with its intrinsic value, and not be exposed to this world and its great temptations (such as sexual prohibitions that exist in the workplace), or to work as well and barely manage to study two hours a day under terrible pressure?
Answer
Is that a question? I assume it is.
In my opinion, it is impossible to speak about what is preferable in general terms. Each person according to what suits him. As a rule, someone who remains in study in order to avoid temptations is making a mistaken decision. Someone who studies because that is his path to begin with—that is, of course, a different discussion (depending on whether it suits him—excellent).
It is accepted among us that the Torah was not given to ministering angels, and it is not right to flee from life in order to keep the Torah (except in extreme cases, and in my opinion we are not there).
Maimonides writes that someone who cannot refrain from evil speech should flee to the deserts. And the Alter of Novardok wrote about this: who would actually carry out this recommendation of Maimonides? Only people of tremendous spiritual stature. And even to them Maimonides recommends fleeing to the deserts.
But I, the insignificant one, think this is a very problematic recommendation (and I very much doubt that Maimonides himself meant it literally. But that does not matter for our purposes). In any case, we have not seen the masses of the Jewish people living in caves in solitude so as not to stumble in prohibitions between one person and another. Prohibitions between man and his fellow were given so that we should live among people in the proper way, not to prevent us from living. About this I would apply the rabbinic exposition: “and live by them,” and not die by them. By the way, in my opinion this is not my own novel interpretation, but an extension of the true intent of that exposition.
Discussion on Answer
Aharon, where did I say that this is agreed upon? I wrote my opinion. On the contrary—does anyone not know that there is a difference between Haredim and moderns on this matter? That is exactly what the question itself revolves around: whether the Haredim are right or not.
But even the Haredim do not take this all the way. They too (for the most part) oppose unreasonable seclusion. The question is what is reasonable and what is not, and who is for us and who is against us.
Even the Chazon Ish, who wrote that the yeshivot are the deserts of today (Noah’s Ark), was not worried about the evil speech violations committed there and did not recommend fleeing to an actual desert and literal caves. It is a manner of speaking, not an instruction to be interpreted literally.
At what intellectual level, in the Rabbi’s opinion, should someone be in order to devote his entire life exclusively to Torah? For example, does he need to be at a level where in a few years he will be able to publish a very important book that will contribute to the Torah world, or if in the end he will come out as just a simple rabbi who knows how to study and teach at a reasonable level—is that enough? Or is it not connected to achievements, and if he connects to learning (even though there will not be dazzling results in the end), should he study all his life and support himself from charity?
(And indeed, as Aharon noted, in the Haredi public study in yeshivot and kollels is considered the fleeing to the deserts in our generation.)
This is not only a question of intellectual level. There are those who will contribute through teaching or halakhic ruling, and there are those who will contribute by writing books and original ideas, and others will contribute by their very dedication and diligence. Someone who excels in one of all these is justified in being supported over time. The point is that it is not right to support people merely so that they can remain in the deserts and not in human society. That is the main reason relied on today, and precisely it is the reason (almost the only one) that is not justified. Of course, if someone wants to and can support himself, all the better. Exactly as society supports an artist or a scientist if he is talented and has a promising future. Others too can engage in this, so long as it is done at their own expense.
And of course the question of proportions and the number of learners still remains. But I assume that if people were required, as a condition for being supported, to have abilities like those I described, there would be no problem of excessive numbers.
Can the Rabbi share why he did not choose to continue in kollel all his life?
And also, if a person can write a decent Torah book that does not bring any great new message to the world, or develop an important scientific innovation, which is preferable?
It did not suit me for various reasons. I wanted to engage in other things.
I do not know how to say what is preferable. Torah has intrinsic value, and scientific development is significant if it contributes something unique (that another person would not have arrived at). It is hard to answer just like that. See a bit in Column 121:
https://mikyab.net/%D7%91%D7%99%D7%9F-%D7%9E%D7%9B%D7%95%D7%9F-%D7%A6%D7%9E%D7%AA-%D7%9C%D7%9E%D7%9B%D7%95%D7%9F-%D7%95%D7%99%D7%99%D7%A6%D7%9E%D7%9F-%D7%90%D7%95-%D7%97%D7%A9%D7%99%D7%91%D7%95%D7%AA%D7%95-%D7%A9%D7%9C/
I agree with your words, and I am surprised that you wrote them as though they were something agreed upon, even though this question is disputed between the classic Haredi public and the Modern Orthodox public.
In the Haredi public you hear a lot of understanding that, by the natural way of the world, one should study a profession, matriculation subjects, and academic studies in order to earn a proper living and marry off one’s many children. You hear the understanding that, according to logic, there is an obligation to share the burden and enlist in the IDF. The Haredi public does not take these steps because it lives by an ethos of “fleeing to the deserts.”
It is very well known that the Chazon Ish replied to someone (I do not remember whom) who asked why we do not fulfill Maimonides’ command today, when winds of heresy and apostasy are blowing outside. And the Chazon Ish answered: “The yeshivot are the deserts of today.”
That is, the voluntary confinement of many Haredi kollel men in kollels, and of the women in teaching at Beit Yaakov and in jobs that bring starvation wages, is the fleeing to the deserts.