208) RAV KOOK ON: WHAT IF I DON'T LIKE STUDYING GEMARA?

INTRODUCTION:

People can say what they like about R. Avraham Yitzchak haCohen Kook (1865-1935) - also known by the acronym HaRAaYaH - but one thing is certain: he had courage.

He touched on issues which go directly to the heart, soul and psyche of contemporary Judaism and he did not back down. He was so outspoken that even members of his own family censored his teachings and withheld many aspects of his spiritual and intellectual legacy.

Although he was both a mystic and a Talmud scholar, much of the religious right has not only ignored his thinking but has ridiculed him and relegated him to the waste bin Jewish religious leadership. I too was guilty of such an attitude.

DEFINING THE ESSENCE OF TORAH STUDY:

It is important to point out that the default setting for Torah study has essentially become Gemara.

Any serious place of learning, whether school, Yeshiva or Kollel would offer Gemara as the main subject matter for study. Other topics may be thrown in here and there as well but serious Torah study is generally defined by Gemara.

As we shall see, Rav Kook had some interesting observations about this.

In this article, we shall look at Rav Kook’s bold definition of the parameters of Torah learning - and particularly Torah study-material.

His views on this topic were subject to much censorship and it only recently that they are being discovered and published.

Some sensitive Readers may take umbrage to Rav Kook’s controversial views, particularly on this matter - but it must be borne in mind that it was for these very reasons that he was so severely censored.

This article is written for those who struggle with relating to Gemara in a meaningful manner, not for those who are nurtured by it.

THE SPIRITUAL REVOLUTION OF RAV KOOK:

I have drawn from The Spiritual Revolution of Rav Kook by R. Ari Ze’ev Schwartz[1], which offers an introduction to, and translation of, some pertinent and important writings of Rav Kook – many of which were unknown until now.

In his introduction[2], R. Schwartz concurs that Gemara is the main focus of Torah study which is emphasized in most learning institutions. He says:

“...I spent eight years in yeshiva, and the majority of time was spent on Gemara. I do not wish to diminish the importance of this form of learning, but there are many who connect to other parts of the Torah, yet are forced to spend their time on topics they feel least connected to...

Unfortunately, many have not been introduced to most areas of the Torah...

...Rav Kook encourages us to find a personal Torah – and to realize that there is not only one type of Torah, but an endless variety that can speak to countless individuals.”

WHY SOME JEWS LEAVE RELIGION:

We shall quote from parts of the severely cropped and censored section of Orot haTorah (9:6) of Rav Kook, which R. Schwartz now presents and translates as follows:

“Many people have left religion because in their learning and spiritual perfection, they have betrayed their unique personalities.”

This is a most powerful analysis of contemporary religion. 

Contrary to the belief of many religious leaders, not everyone is happy to be the proverbial sausage in the sausage factory.

Imagine; Rav Kook is telling us that the root cause of many people turning their backs on Judaism is because their learning - the very glue which bonds them to their faith - is betraying their true inner personalities!

In other words, according to Rav Kook, there exists a certain regimen of Torah study which jolts roughly against the essential spiritual makeup of many individuals. This can be most damaging.

When this occurs, there are one of two options:

Either the student numbs his or her mind to their intuitive personality, and suppresses that mind as being the ‘evil inclination’, which then gets ‘rectified’ by even more intense study to quieten its protest.

Or the student adopts - ironically a more straightforward and logical approach - and leaves religion.

Rav Kook continues:

[Note that the terms Halacha, Gemara, Talmud are used interchangeably in this context.]

“For example, a person might be naturally talented in matters of aggadah [non-legal subject matter like philosophy and mysticism etc.[3]] and be unsuited to constant immersion in matters of halachah [minutia of laws].

Yet because he does not recognize his unique talents, he occupies himself in matters of Gemara and its commentaries, since he sees that this is customary in the religious world today.”

What strikes one about this statement of Rav Kook is his use of the word ‘today’. Is this reference merely incidental, and has this always been the practice within the religious world – or is he alluding to a particular overemphasis on Talmudic study which has taken place in relatively recent times and is now ‘customary in the religious world today’?

HATRED?

Rav Kook pulls no punches when he then writes with his typical intellectual honesty:

“But deep inside his [the Gemara student’s][4] soul he feels a hatred towards the material he is learning, since constant involvement in it does not suit his unique natural gifts.”

It is hard to think of any other leading rabbinic figure who has written of Gemara in such a manner.

‘HALACHIC DEPRESSION’:

Rav Kook writes about a type of ‘Halachic depression’ that can sometimes set in:

“Sometimes, one who has the type of soul that is capable of climbing to the greatest spiritual heights will become depressed and saddened when immersed in the little details of halacha.

Such a person may feel imprisoned, almost as if chained inside the law.

Nevertheless, the solution is not to abandon halacha. Rather, one must train oneself to seek the value of every detail until one finds its spiritual source and significance.”[5]

SEEKING ‘ANOTHER TYPE OF TORAH’:

Once a person reaches such a state of feeling spiritually 'depressed' and harbouring an inner ‘hated’ towards a religious study programme predominantly comprised of technical legalities, Rav Kook suggests that it is time to move on to ‘another type of Torah’.

Before he does this, though, he gets even more descriptively graphic, while at the same time careful not to criticise the important role of Talmudic study. And he weaves this bold yet extremely fine line all into one poignant paragraph:

“However, if he were to find the specific type of Torah that fits his unique talents and immerse himself in it, he would then immediately recognise that the nauseating feeling he experienced when immersed in matters of Halacha was not coming from any flaw in that holy and important type of learning. It was rather his soul expressing its desire to be absorbed in another type of Torah.

This person would then stay truly faithful to the Torah and become an expert in the type of Torah that is unique to him.”

Most would concur that ‘hatred’ and ‘nauseating’ are very unusual adjectives for describing Gemara, especially when used within rabbinic literature.

But, again, Rav Kook is careful to use these terms to describe the subjective feelings of the student (not the subject matter itself) whose soul just does not jell with a study curriculum primarily focussed on the intricacies of a legal disciple and code.

Besides being a mystic, he himself was also a great Talmudic scholar and he certainly upheld the primary position of such study. - Except that in Rav Kook’s mind, no one genre of study was to be considered the be-all and end-all of the mitzvah of Torah study.

SPIRITUAL 'NAUSEA'?

Notwithstanding Rav Kook carefully qualifying his position, he continues relentlessly:

“Unfortunately, because this person does not recognize the true reason for his feelings of nausea toward halacha, he forcefully ignores his nature.”

The point is that precisely because one ‘forcefully ignores his nature’, that the individual now becomes another victim of a system which has sadly been falsely defined, narrowed and limited. And no rabbinical authority alerted him or her to the fact that there are other equal but different avenues of Torah study which should rather be pursued which may be more appealing to the individual.

THE FOCUS ON HALACHA:

Rav Kook offers a brief historical perspective as to why Gemara rose to its position of pre-eminence:

“In the course of time, the concern with the work of the rabbis dominated over the work of the prophets, and prophecy ceased altogether. After some time, the prominence of spiritual and philosophical principles declined; although they were implicit in the details, they were not sufficiently explained.”

RAV KOOK’S PERSONAL STRUGGLES WITH THIS LIMITATION:

Perhaps Rav Kooks is writing so passionately because he is subliminally referring to himself as well. R. Schwartz reminds us about someone who once came to Rav Kook and mentioned that his son was not interested in studying Torah; to which Rav Kook responded:

“When I was young, I also was not excited to study halachah. My heart was drawn to aggadah. However, by studying aggadah, I came to study halacha. I suggest you teach your son aggadah...”

‘DIVERSITY OF WISDOM’:

Rav Kook then takes this notion even one step further.

Besides broadening Torah study into other non-Talmudic subjects, he furthermore encourages those individuals who are drawn to other branches of wisdom, including secular learning, to follow their minds as well.

He says:

 “There is a great diversity of wisdom that expands even greater than this. One may be strongly attracted to a certain secular wisdom.

Such a person must also follow his unique talents, while setting aside fixed time for learning Torah.

If he does this, then he will succeed in both, because ‘Torah together with the ways of the world is beautiful’ (Pirkei Avot 2:2).”[6]

[See 'Rav Kook's Jealousy of the Secular World'.]

‘ONE SHOULD NOT LIE TO ONE’S SOUL’:

All these views of Rav Kook, which would be considered radical (or worse) in some circles, stem from his desire for truth. 

He was acutely aware of what today we would call ‘Social Judaism’: This is where a strong culture of religious Judaism exists but has brought with it certain societal (as opposed to spiritual) constructs. Very often people are attracted to the heavily nuanced norms and constructs and not necessarily to the deeper and often hidden soul within the matter.

‘THE WHIRLWIND OF EXTERNAL APPROVAL’:

Rav Kook encourages people to think as individuals and to go beyond group. 

He also understands how difficult it is to break out of the cultural hold which sometimes can be like an invisible vice-grip or a ‘whirlwind’:

“One should not lie to one’s soul; one should not deny one’s inner emotions due to the whirlwind of external approval.

If one feels inspired and holy in a specific area of learning, then one must constantly satisfy oneself from this deep pleasure that one’s heart desires."

HIS MESSAGE TO THE RABBINATE:

Rav Kook felt that the Rabbanut was ‘too focused on Halacha.’ He wrote:

“The Rabbanut that I am trying to raise up...should not be boxed in and focussed only on the world of religious law...because matters of religion are in truth matters of life.”[7]

In a letter to Chairman of the Union of Orthodox Rabbis in America, Rav Kook wrote:

“We [the rabbis][8] have abandoned the soul of the Torah....

For too long the most talented among our people have focussed almost exclusively on the practical aspects of the Torah, and even then only on specific sections of it.

Yet the emotional, philosophical, and all the higher spiritual wisdom – where the secrets of redemption and salvation are hidden – we have totally abandoned...

...in our own camp of Torah and faith, we find only darkness”[9]

NOT TO BE INTIMIDATED BY ‘NON-SPIRITUAL RABBIS’:

Almost as if Rav Kook is pre-empting the next step: He seems to know that anyone reading this is going to immediately ask their personal rabbi whether these views are acceptable and whether they may indeed be implemented on a practical level. 

He knows what the answer is going to be, so he warns us not to be, as R. Schwartz puts it, ‘intimidated by non-spiritual rabbis’: 

“Even if one finds great rabbis...to whom matters of spirituality are not important...one’s heart should not despair over one’s inner hunger for ways of spirituality...”[10]

At the end of the day, Rav Kook’s message which has been largely censored and withheld from us till now, is that it is up to us alone as thinking individuals to determine what type of Torah we wish to immerse our souls in.

This is one of those fundamental teachings where there is no middle ground -  the Reader, depending on the individual, will either accept it wholeheartedly or absolutely reject it. 

[For more on Rav Kook's other ideas, see The Censored Writings of Rav Kook.]

SOURCES:

The Spiritual Revolution of Rav Kook by R. Ari Ze’ev Schwartz. (Gefen Publishing House.)

---

[1] Published by Gefen Publishing House.

[2] Chapter 2.

[3] Rav Kook was a mystic so obviously, he was referring to mysticism as a strong alternative.  It should, however, be equally obvious that for rationalists this would include areas of Rationalist Torah study like the philosophy of Maimonides and such similar matters. 

[4] Parenthesis mine.

[5] OT 9:8

[6] KYK1, Pinkas Acharon b’BVoisk, 52.

[7] IR 2, p. 28.

[8] Parenthesis mine.

[9] Letter to R. Yehudah Leib Seltzer.

[10] OT 10.4.

172) ‘ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND PAGES OF RAV KOOK HAVE BEEN WITHHELD FROM US’:

MORE ON THE CENSORED WRITINGS OF RAV KOOK:

A rare edition of Arpilei Tohar – a book cancelled in the middle of its printing!

INTRODUCTION:

Rabbi Avraham Yitzchak haCohen Kook (1865-1935) was the first Ashkenazi Chief Rabbi of British Mandatory Palestine. He is often described as one of the founders and ideologues of religious Zionism. But he was so much more than that.

RAV KOOK WAS MORE THAN A RELIGIOUS ZIONIST:

Although part of his legacy is indeed religious Zionism, according to R. David Bar-Hayim of Machon Shilo, his teachings on Zionism only account for about 10 to 15% of his general writings. Most of his other teachings are relevant to all the other areas of life such as psychology, human relationships, art, history, the association between Torah and Science, as well as to a particularly sophisticated understanding of mysticism.

TOO RADICALLY UNIVERSALIST FOR MAINSTREAM RELIGIOUS ZIONISM?

One the reasons why we generally only see Rav Kook through the prism of religious Zionism, is because his son R. Tzvi Yehudah - who in many ways became a conduit for his teachings - was far more conservative than his father. 

He was wary of his father’s radical universalist writings and apparently wanted to present a particular brand of his father’s teachings and through it, create a populist (and political) movement of religious Zionism in the new state.

A BRIEF BACKGROUND TO R. TZVI YEHUDAH KOOK:

Rav Kook’s son, R. Tzvi Yehudah was an interesting man and very accomplished in his own right. Although the Rosh Yeshiva of Merkaz haRav Yeshiva, he very rarely gave lectures on Halacha and Gemara. A student of his once asked him to give a Gemara lesson and he replied that he would not because he believed that his main mission was to teach Emunah (theology).

While he wrote that the first Rebbe of Chabad, known as the Baal haTanya, was a ‘great man’, he added that the Vilna Gaon ‘even greater’.[1]

Although staunchly Zionistic, he had a measured approach towards Arabs. In 1947 he wrote a letter to the principal of a Jewish school in Jerusalem after he witnessed a group of students physically and verbally harassing two Arab street vendors.

He wrote:

 "I was deeply pained and ashamed at what I saw. This incident, which pained and embarrassed me, requires me to inform you of the need for particular attention to educate against such actions. Students must be taught that such behaviour is prohibited - both due to the essential teachings of Torah, Judaism, and morality, and also due to the practical value for the Jewish community and maintaining peaceful relations with neighbours."[2]

Originally, R. Tzvi Yehudah had been a staunch supporter of the National Religious Party (Mafdal - Miflaga Datit Leumit - established in 1956) but he was later to break with them in 1974 after they joined the Rabin government. 

He also served as leader of the Gush Emunim, or Settler Movement.

It is against this largely political background, that we must view R. Tvi Yehuda as the custodian of his father Rav Kook’s teachings:

THE EIGHT JOURNALS:

In 1924, Rav Kook handed eight journals, known as the Shemona Kevatzim, to his student R. David Cohen haNazir, for editing and publication. Tellingly, he did not give them to his own son, R. Tzvi Yehudah Kook, because he knew that his son did not want them to be published.

OROT HAKODESH:

For years, R. David Cohen haNazir, worked on various sections of the manuscripts of these Journals and eventually, on Rav Kook’s deathbed, his student presented him with the first pages of what was to become four volumes of the work which was later published under the title Orot haKodesh.

OROT:

Later on, Rav Kook’s son R. Tzvi Yehudah - in keeping with his vision to build a strong religious Zionist ideology, collated those writings of his father which dealt particularly with the return to the Land of Israel and the building of a nation – and these were published under the simple title Orot.

The son then encouraged all his followers to specifically read the Orot. A framed letter from R. Tzvi Yehudah was placed on the door of the study hall of the Merkaz haRav Yeshivah, encouraging all the students to read Orot (implying that they should not read the broader Orot haKodesh which, as mentioned, was published by Rav Kook’s student, R. David Cohen haNazir.) 

ARPILEI TOHAR:

As early as 1914, Rav Kook himself had decided to publish the second of the Eight Journals, known as Arpilei Tohar (Mists of Purity) as a separate book.

In that same year, Rabbi Kook, in a letter to his son concerning the printing of this book and its contents, wrote:

"…I was overtaken by a yearning to print some of my writings, as they are, and I have begun to print ...Arpilei Tohar…I hope that the thoughts will be blessed as they are without arrangement (i.e. unedited[3]), perhaps their success will stand out precisely because of the lack of arrangement…".[4]

Rav Kook was known to prefer to publish his ‘first drafts’ as he felt they were more sincere and true than the more ‘edited’ versions[5].

However, his son was opposed to the publication of Arpilei Tohar, as it was deemed by him to be too radical. He continued to voice his opposition until his father got so fatigued that in desperation he told his son to do as he saw fit. Immediately R. Tzvi Yehudah went to the printers, who had already started working on the printing process and were up to page 80 - and he physically turned off the electricity running the presses.

Interestingly, R. Bar-Hayim describes how he still has a set of those first eighty pages in his personal library.

Years later, in 1983 (a year after R. Tzvi Yehudah had passed away), Arpilei Tohar was finally published - but with six missing sections!

Then some years later, the original manuscripts of Arpilei Tohar were ‘obtained by interesting manners’ (as is often the case when Rav Kook’s previously censored writings begin to slowly appear) - and the Shemona Kevatzim was eventually published.

(Sadly, even R. David Cohen haNazir had censored some of his teacher’s writings on a number of occasions, although not nearly to the extent of R. Tzvi Yehudah.)

WITHHOLDING RAV KOOK’S WRITINGS:

According to a letter from former Chief Rabbi and Rosh Yeshiva of Merkaz haRav, R. Avraham Shapira, altogether 100 000 pages of unpublished manuscripts have been kept from us!

R. Bar-Hayim makes the point that these hidden texts would be particularly pertinent to people today - even more so than to the generation in which they were first written. He says that many young religious nationalists are today joining other movements such as Breslov and Chabad because they feel that their own Dati Leumi ideology has nothing deep or meaningful to offer them anymore.

To this day, people are still withholding and trying to prevent many of the teachings of Rav Kook from being disseminated, and some of his original writing is beginning to fade away due to age.

He makes the point that:  “We must demand from those who have control over the manuscripts of Rav Kook, that these writings be released for the benefit of Klal Yisrael...One can only wonder what treasures of Torah thought remain for the Jewish People to discover.”

SOME IDEAS FROM ARPILEI TOHAR:

What was written in Arpilei Tohar that made it so contentious? I cannot say with any degree of authority exactly what it was that made R. Tzvi Yehudah so uncomfortable - to the extent that he turned off the power to the printing presses - but the following extracts from the book may give some indication of the issues that were covered in the work:

CRITICISM OF RAMBAM:

Rav Kook was daring enough to criticise Rambam for attempting to provide reasons for some of the commandments.[6]

THE MESSIAH WILL INTERPRET THE TORAH OF MOSHE:

Rav Kook said that all of mankind derived from one source. This may have been seen as somewhat contradicting the notion of only the Jewish people being a ‘chelek Eloka mima’al (mamash)’ – (Truly) a part of G-d Himself.

He wrote:

“Messiah will interpret the Torah of Moses, by revealing in the world how all the peoples and divisions of mankind derive their spiritual nourishment from the one fundamental source, while the content conforms to the spirit of each nation according to its history and all its distinctive features...Nevertheless, all will bond together and derive nourishment from one source, with a supernal friendship and a strong inner assurance.”[7]

FAITH WITHOUT MIND:

While some systems within Judaism were emphasizing the idea of Emunah Peshuta – a simple (non-intellectually based) belief in G-d, Rav Kook was writing:

אמונה שאין השכל מסכים לה, מעוררת היא קצף ואכזריות, מפני שהצד היותר עליון שבאדם, שהוא השכל, נעשה עלוב מחמתה.

“Faith with which the mind does not agree arouses anger and cruelty because the human being's higher aspect, the mind, becomes frustrated with it.”[8]

SPONTANEOUS SPIRITUALITY:

Rav Kook seems to go against the popular teaching that there is always a righteous man in every generation who is there to lead the way:

"Sometimes, when there is a need to go beyond the words of the Torah, and there is no one in the generation who can show the way, the matter comes about by a sudden bursting forth..."

AN UNVEILED REFERENCE TO PREVIOUS FALSE MESSIAHS:

It is surprising to see that Rav Kook makes open reference to previous false Messiahs and writes that their ‘sparks’ will ultimately be incorporated, after undergoing a ‘rectification’, within Mashiach ben David:

“... the foetuses who stood to be Messiahs but fell, were trapped and broken. Their sparks were scattered and seek a living, enduring correction (tikkun) in the foundation of David, King of Israel, “... the anointed (Mashiach) of God.”[9]

Commenting on this passage, R. Betzalel Naor writes that, remarkably, according to Rav Kook; “There is a poetic justice here. None of the unsuccessful Messiahs’ attempts at redemption were in vain; all contribute in some way to the final Redemption.”[10]

Now that’s rather controversial. But that was Rav Kook! Imagine how many more surprises may be waiting for us to discover?

SPREADING GOODNESS:

Let us conclude with one of the most well-known extracts from Arpilei Tohar - one which no one can really take any umbrage to:

“The purest tzaddikim do not complain about evil;
Rather they increase justice. 

They do not complain about godlessness,
But increase faith. 

They do not complain about ignorance, 
But increase wisdom.”[11]

   

---

[1] Mitoch Hatorah HaGo’elet.

[2] Miskin, Maayana (March 7, 2013).

[3] Parenthesis mine.

[4] Igrot HaRa'ayah, Vol. 2, Jerusalem 1946, pp. 292-293, Siman 687.

[5] From a lecture on Rav Kook, by Dr. Henry Abramsom.

[6] Arpilei Tohar, 22.

[7] Arpilei Tohar, 62-63.

[8] Arpilei Tohar, 105.

[9] Arpilei Tohar, 18.

[10] Post Sabbatian Sabbatianism, by Betzalel Naor.

[11] Arpilei Tohar, 39.

170) DID RAV KOOK WANT TO START A NEW CHASSIDIC MOVEMENT?

1804 Dubna printing of Shaar haShamayim by R. Avraham Cohen Herrera (1570-1635). This book formed the basis of Rav Kook’s thesis for the creation of a ‘superior Chassidism’.

PINKESEI HA-RA’AYA:  - ANOTHER RECENTLY SURFACED DOCUMENT FROM RAV KOOK:

INTRODUCTION:

In a fascinating article which I will paraphrase, R. Bazalel Naor shares an extract from some of Rav Kook’s writing where it appears evident that Rav Kook did indeed attempt to start a new form of modern Chassidism.[1]

For those familiar with the style and tenor of Rav Kook’s teachings, it does seem that he was captivated by a new and invigorating type of spirituality. His supporters seized upon this, much like the early followers of the Baal Shem Tov, while his detractors opposed him with almost as much vitriol as the early Mitnagdim.

A NEW CHASSIDISM:

This idea of a new Chassidism is not just speculation by modern day re-interpreters of Rav Kook.  It was something already expressed by one of Rav Kook’s students, R. Yaakov Moshe Harlap, who wrote to the Gerrer Rebbe, expressing this selfsame notion that Rav  Kook was a new Baal Shem Tov, invigorating the mundane lives of both religious and particularly irreligious Jews.

And Rav Kook himself started making references to a type of Neo-Chassidism in his Orot haTechiya:

Rav Kook expressed the need for “a great Chassidism, flowing from a sophisticated understanding of G-d”.

He said that the time had come for “a superior Chassidism”, an extremely “elevated Chassidim...And in this way, the nation will be able to open its eyes and relate with a proper heart to its practical challenges (which lie ahead).”[2]

Rav Kook was well acquainted with the Chassidic movement. His mother was related to the Tzemach Tzedek of Chabad. She inherited a button from the coat of the Tzemach Tzedek which she sewed onto the top of her young son’s yarmulka. He understood Chasidism well and he knew how successful the movement had become. He was cognizant of its achievements.

But he also knew its flaws.

He wanted to discard what he considered to be the non-sophisticated aspects of the movement and replace them with ‘higher knowledge’.  He too was a mystic and wanted to perpetuate the mystical doctrine - but in a contemporary way that traditional Chassidim would never have dreamed of. 

He continues:

“The nation (now) needs to establish great Chassidim...(with) elevated people...with exceptional aptitude for knowledge...”

“Give strength to the higher knowledge, to a radical and sophisticated Chassidism...”

It is not even necessary to read between the lines to see what Rav Kook is referring to – he wants to create new radical Chassidism and a mysticism which is deeply spiritual but at the same time uniquely and radically ‘sophisticated’, ‘worldly’ and one which ‘opens the eyes’.

He wants to infuse traditional mysticism with worldly wisdom!

PINKESEI HA-RA’AYAH:

Recently, another hitherto unknown piece of Rav Kook’s writing surfaced. (For more, see The Censored Writings of Rav Kook, and A Recently Discovered Document.) It is a journal entitled Pinkesei haRa’ayah.

In the journal, Rav Kook elaborates in more explicit detail, on his vision of a new form of Chassidism.

Rav Kook finds precedent for his thesis in a 17th-century work, called Shaar haShamayim (Gates of Heaven), by R. Avraham Cohen Herrera (1570-1635)[3].

Let us see who exactly R. Herrera was and why Rav Kook chose him to base his innovative ideas upon:

R. AVRAHAM COHEN HERRERA:

R. Herrera, born to a family of Spanish Marranos, became a student of R. Yisrael Sarug who was teaching Lurianic Kabbalah which he had learned from his teacher, the Ari Zal himself.[4]

He was highly respected by the Moroccan Sultan and he became his diplomatic representative. In 1596, when a joint force of English and Dutch sailors captured the Spanish port of Cadiz, he was detained for a ransom of 120 000 ducats, and was held a prisoner for five years in the Tower of London. When he was released he started living openly as a Jew.

Later, in the port of Ragusa (in Croatia), he met R. Yisrael Sarug and eventually he had a hand in spreading Sarugian Kabbalah throughout Europe. Many Italian Kabbalists were profoundly influenced by Sarugian Kabbalah.

In his book, R. Herrera moves with great ease from Lurianic Kabbalah to Neo-Platonic rationalism and philosophy as if it were the most natural thing in the world.

RAV KOOK IS INFLUENCED BY R. AVRAHAM COHEN HERRERA:

While many may have criticised R. Herrera for his blending of Kabbalah and secular knowledge, Rav Kook believed that this was to be held up as an example for all to see.[5]

Rav Kook was inspired by the notion of creating a synthesis between Kabbalah and modern science.

To achieve this amalgamation of the two disciplines, Rav Kook was anticipating a revolutionary form of ‘expansive’ Chassidism.

He did not just skirt lightly around the issue of blending Kabbalah and science in a poetic sense. He expressly wrote about bringing about a real blend of Kabbalah and Maddah (science).

He even coined a new phrase to underscore this idea, by introducing the concept of ‘KEMACH’ (flour[6]) – an acronym for:  Kabbalah, Maddah (science) and Chassidut.

Lest one think that this new Chassidism would lead to secularism because of its inclusion of the secular science component, Rav Kook wrote: “Such a (form of) Chassidism will certainly not lack the (spiritual) wealth of the latter-day Chassidim (referring to the Chassidim of the Baal Shem Tov).”

Rav Kook’s new Chassidut was, therefore, not to be a watered-down form of secular Chassidism, but rather an intensely mystical and spiritual movement which also demanded proficiency in matters of secular knowledge and science.

If this vision of Rav Kook appears unbelievable (as it did to me when I first came across it), the following is how Rav Kook writes all this in his own words, in his newly surfaced Pinkesei haRa’aya: [7]

RAV KOOK’S VISION IN HIS OWN WORDS:

“Kabbalah must bond with all the sciences; to live with them and through them. So did the great [sages] throughout the ages; and more than they achieved—it is obligatory upon us to achieve. The spiritual world that bestows its spirit upon the thinking man, was enhanced by constant appearances of the light of intellect. This enhancement dulls the oppositions between one science and another, and once the barriers have come down—the different sciences actually come to one another’s aid.

Science in all of its breadth, in all of its various aspects—spiritual and practical, societal and global—must find its place alongside the supernal wisdom [i.e. Kabbalah].

A shining example of this would be the book Sha‘ar ha-Shamayim by Rabbi Abraham Cohen Herrera, who was the second in a line extending from Rabbi Isaac Luria through Rabbi Israel Sarug, disciple of Rabbi Isaac Luria. Herrera was inspired to write his book in Spanish, in full view of the cultured world of the day.

With a breadth of intellect and feelings of respect and affection, the author toured all the philosophical studies that represented the finest literature of his time. Rabbi Isaac Aboab [da Fonseca] who admired Herrera—translating the work into Hebrew for the benefit of Hebrews—followed in his spirit, which is the spirit of true culture worthy of Torah scholars who are truly “men of holiness.”

The preparedness of the thinker—pure of knowledge and holy of thought—to absorb into his midst the best thoughts of the finest writers, the thinkers, the sages of every people and language, of every subject of science; and to shine upon them, from them and through them, the divine light—this is the unchanging way of the world, upon which we are obligated to travel.

[This synthesis of] science and the supernal illumination that expands the soul, produces a strong character in our entire organic unity, spiritual and material.

We need now a rich, broad, luminous Hasidism to illumine us!

Such a Hasidism will certainly not be lacking all the [spiritual] wealth of the latter-day Hasidism [i.e. of Rabbi Israel Ba‘al Shem Tov], but it must be expansive.

[We need] a Hasidism that negates no good; no science, peace, Torah, or talent, but rather crystallizes and purifies all. When understood as such, people with heart will not oppose it.

This Hasidism is needed by men of powerful spirit, just as the average Mussar[8] (Ethics) is necessary for the masses. This Hasidism contains all the ways of Mussar, but it surpasses them; it takes them out from fear and darkness to confidence and light; from servitude and weakness to sovereignty and strength of spirit. This Hasidism must be combined with Kabbalah and science, so that greatness of spirit not grow inimical to routine ethics (which the average acquire through revulsion brought on by fear).

And the more enhanced the knowledge and understanding of Torah...the more the ideal soul will expand, as it fills with the splendor of Kabbalah, the sciences, and Hasidism.

In this regard, I invoke the adage: “If there be no KeMaH [Kabbalah, Maddah and Chassidut], there be no Torah[9]...”

ANALYSIS:

 A very valid question would be why it was that Rav Kook specifically chose R. Herrera’s 17^th century Shaar haShamayim as his model for his innovative vision of creating a modern blend of mysticism and rationalism.

- My humble feeling is that Rav Kook decided to go with R. Herrera rather than with anyone else, because he could more strongly root his system within a more genuine[10] form of Kabbalah which stemmed directly from the very student of the Ari Zal. This way his precedent would be more authoritative due to its proximity to the Ari Zal, the founder of Lurianic Kabbalah.

Rav Kook, in fact, states this himself when he refers to R. Sarug as: “second in a line extending from Rabbi Isaac Luria...”  And furthermore, Rav Kook continues to make the point that R. Herrera wrote his book in Spanish, as opposed to Hebrew[11] - under the title Puerta del Cielo -   “in full view of the cultured world of the day.”

Thus emphasizing that at that time, this way of thinking was commonplace and quite acceptable.

Either way, after reading Rav Kook’s own words, it does seem clear that he did indeed want to bring about a unique form of Chassidism:  

- A new movement of spiritually inspired but rational intellectuals who would succeed in combining extreme elements that are usually considered to be mutually exclusive.

Could this fascinating revelation be one of the reasons why this journal of Rav Kook is not well known – and it would have remained so had it not somehow ‘surfaced recently’?

---

[1] See The Hasidism of Rav Kook, by Bezalel Naor.

[2] Orot haTechiya ch. 4.

[3] Also known as Alfonso Nunez de Herrera.

[4] There is much debate as to which student of the Ari Zal transmitted most accurately the teachings of the Ari Zal – was it R. Chaim Vital or R. Yisrael Sarug? See THE BATTLE FOR THE SOUL OF THE ARI ZAL.

[5] Interestingly, R. Naor writes: “Rather than choosing Herrera as his role model, Rav Kook might have done better opting for Herrera’s contemporary, Joseph Solomon Delmedigo (or as he is known in Hebrew, “YaShaR mi-Candia”) as an exemplary amalgam of Kabbalah and science. (By the way, Delmedigo’s Kabbalah too is of Sarugian lineage.)” For more on R. Delmedigo, see: R. ‘GUISEPPE’ DELMEDIGO AND ‘RABBI’ GALILEO.

[6] As in: ‘If there is no flour, there can be no Torah.’

[7] Pinkesei ha-Ra’ayah, vol. IV, ed. Z.M. Levin and B.Z. Kahana-Shapira (Jerusalem, 2017), Pinkas ha-Dapim 1:34, 88-92. (As cited by R. Naor in his article.)

[8] Rav Kook did criticise the Mussar movement of R. Yisrael Salanter, which he considered a simple philosophy for the average masses, as he said it kept them in a state of ‘fear and darkness’.

[9] Avot 3:17.

[10] As pointed out, some would argue that R. Chaim Vital was the more ‘authentic’ student of the Ari Zal.

[11] It was later translated into Hebrew by R. Yitzchak Avoav (see the title page of later editions of Shaar haShamayim.)