Over & Out

My Take on R. Avigdor Goldbergers Article & R. Dovid Bashevkins response

It’s been quite some time since I’ve sat down to actually put together some of my thoughts and publish them as a post. Baruch Hashem, lots of good things—kein yirbu… (this article is a bit sloppy and some of the points were already made by other writers as I was working on the draft)

Here are the original articles:

Overklalified

GUEST POST: Underklalified: The real reason we feel communally burnt out - and how to fix it

Post-Klalified

How to fix "Overklalified" Pt. 1

One of the advantages of Substack is that it gives a platform to many intelligent voices in the frum community whose opinions are otherwise not heard at the table of communal discourse.

This question really cuts deeply into the core of what our goal as a tzibbur is. However, what makes such inquiries difficult is the assumption such a question is based upon.

We, the Orthodox community—as both writers noted—have become victims of our own success. As a result, we find ourselves seemingly not innovating. The cynic within me wonders whether modernity has given us this messianic drive to change the world. We find such notions at the center of discourse in segments of Orthodoxy that are products of modernity. Think no further than Modern Orthodoxy.

Even a cursory glance at the writings of Rabbi Lord Jonathan Sacks zt”l reveals a focus on Judaism as a universal model of ethics: to be a light among the nations, to “widen our tent,” so to speak. However it’s not difficult to poke right into the Brightly painted piñata with just a quick glance at the ever growing defecation of the younger gen Modox going OTD¹. Or towards Black Hat borderline yeshiva lifestyle

And this is an idea that is also central to much of Religious Zionist thought, the idea of broadening Halakhic practice, the rabbanut, the attempts to re-establish a sanhedrin in heichal shlomo, Gush Emunim, and the general attempt to reintroduce judaism as a Religious Nation in its Homeland. Grand ideas of revealing Hashem’s glory in this world through the building of Eretz Yisrael and a new Post-Galus identity have also perhaps been losing steam a quick visit to the yishuvim will reveal an older idealistic generation of Settlers with a younger generation that has either 1. slipped in its level of religious observance (whether due to military service or other factors) 2. Extreme Hilltop Anarchist (not necessarily a bad thing, but nonetheless off the road paven by leaders such as R. Aviner, R. Eliyahu etc.) 3. Heading towards Charedi lifestyle.

Chabad has maintained these beliefs and practices perhaps with much success but without no small amount of opposition and strange beliefs practices perhaps the same can be said of Breslov in Israel.

But Traditional Judaism for sure in its GMJ (Galus Mode Judaism) has always stayed focused for the most part on community and halachic observance. And that is what Rav Aharon came to build in America.

In R’ Dovid’s response to the original article he proposes such an idea of broadening the tent.

What I believe is Dovid’s main mistake is that he wishes to define our mission as uniting all Jews based on a shared historical connection and this concept of Avinu-Malkeinu. As such, he argues that we must make room in Klal Yisrael for everyone. This is precisely where the Chareidi—or, as I would prefer, “Yeshiva Community”—and Dovid part ways. Because while yes, we do wish to bring back as many of our brethren as possible, who says that shared history is what defines us? We are, in fact, a community of faith. Based on Halacha Observance the traditional form of Judaism. So yes, at times it may be narrow, but outreach means bringing Jews into the fold of true Judaism not the creation of some new entity. It’s your sense of Klal that they fundamentally oppose. Believing that Judaism cannot be bent to accommodate, for example proud LGBTQ+ activists², something you’ve expressed difficulty with (Which I fully get was done with the best of intentions, and wasn’t a sinister plot to support such behaviors etc.), is something the Charedi Camp will never budge from. And the suggestion of reaching out will not solve the Yeshiva Worlds problems.

---

Now here’s a few comments on the article by R. Avigdor Goldberger:

“Our Yeshivos and Bais Yaakovs are producing in large numbers, yet there seems to be an industrial-like approach, as if Yiddishkeit is something you do, not something you are.”

What Goldberger is saying is both very much prevalent—and bound to implode.

We have thousands learning in BMG. But go take a poll among the chaburos on 6th or 7th Street. Ask people if they feel accomplished in their yeshiva limmud. The answer will shock you—or perhaps, if you’re already on Substack, it won’t.

Now don’t get me wrong: learning b’iyun is amazing, invigorating, and, in essence, the ultimate form of learning.³ However, is the current mahalach actually playing that role? Or has it become a mass-produced “arts and crafts” kit, where thousands of people sit in a room and “learn up” (more accurately: read) marei mekomos?

Is this the methodology that R’ Chaim Brisker innovated? How can one feel a sense of fulfillment when he’s merely reading sources and gribbling over the same few lines of Gemara for weeks on end? How many people can actually propose sevaros that are logical and coherent? How many high-caliber chiddushim are being written?

I propose there be a return to what I call “organic learning”: simply sitting with a Gemara and reading the page. (Obviously, this task is only going to work for someone who has developed decent learning skills. Yes, the current iyun mahalach must be used as a pedagogical approach to teach people how to learn. But at some point, you have to spread your wings. Have you ever seen someone, 10 years after getting their license, still taking driver’s ed?⁴)

The result of the current system is that learning becomes impersonal and detached from one’s identity—because he hasn’t put any of himself into the limmud. This leads to a kind of “separation of church and state,” if you will.

You can see the results. Have you ever been in a Beis Medrash on Shabbos afternoon? If you have, you’ve probably noticed a very large number of Mesivta bochurim and younger Beis Medrash guys. How many BMG guys will you see? Perhaps a few from that top 20% who actually find fulfillment in digging within the narrow limmud—the guys who do Oraiysa Second Seder (I don’t, so this isn’t a virtue signal), and the older yungerleit long out of the machzor.

But what has become of those billions of “אם לא בריתי יומם ולילה” shmuzen that were delivered so passionately?

Yet the establishment has dug in its heels. Any thoughts of change trigger a flare-up in the amygdala, bringing painful flashbacks of the Czarist government’s attempts to infiltrate the Volozhin Yeshiva, generational Hungarian “חדש אסור מן התורה” trauma, and—let’s not forget—the token Telzer, with his classic, incoherent, high-vocabulary anti-YU rhetoric.

This is just one of my personal observations.

The Past 20 Years

“Twenty years ago, when a yeshivaman hung a picture of Rav Aharon Kotler on his wall, it wasn’t a statement of “I will be Rav Aharon.” Rather, it was a declaration: “I am a soldier in Rav Aharon’s army.” His sense of mission, purpose, and self-worth was found in his role within a communal cause—building Torah in America.

It was an external mission. We were building communal infrastructure—communities, yeshivos, schools, shuls, and the financial systems to support them. We toiled, we sweated, we worked, and we succeeded—together. We were all grains of sand along the seashore, collectively holding back the mighty waves.”

This paragraph alone is worthy of an entire series of articles. Because—as Dovid so eloquently describes—what exactly was Rav Aharon’s mission?

To build Torah Communities in America. This mission was to build something that wasn’t in existence now that it is, real leadership must innovate in paving the path forward.

One only has to look briefly at the institutions founded by Lakewood talmidim to understand this. Most of the early talmidim went on to establish mosdos and helped build American Orthodoxy—whether through Torah U’Mesorah⁵, or the yeshivos modeled after Lakewood such as Long Beach, Philadelphia, YFR, and others. They were spread across America. Other talmidim took jobs as rabbis in communities, educators, or leaders in the broader klal. The goal was to build and yes in America it was Read this: Innovation.

While BMG today does have out-of-town kollelim that focus on communal engagement and outreach, the overarching theme of Lakewood remains clear:

Rav Aharon came to fight the tide of America.⁶

Which while partially true, has been reinterpreted by the successive generations and by a historical revisionism by those who didn’t actually know him, to be a reactionary movement that’s sole purpose is to fight.

So that explains a lot of the inward turn and lack of innovation in community building and outreach. We must insulate is the natural response of your understanding if your mesorah is such.

[And in a future article I hope to explain why Lakewood isn’t the sole or perhaps even the main influence on the forming of American yeshivas]

The more accurate description is a movement to rebuild what was destroyed in the Holocaust. With a messianic or better yet pre messianic idea of “The Letzte Stanzia”.⁷

I believe this issue runs deep and the conversation long overdue. While I don’t profess to have a solution ״שאלת חכם חצי תשובה״

The solution is going to have to be something that works within the traditional framework. I believe both Yitz⁸ & Yosef Hirsh have touched on potential pathways forward.

But perhaps we must also ask ourselves, ווי לאַנג קענען מיר בלייבן אין אַ סטאַנציע?

1. I believe studies back this claim up

2. The controversy that erupted over the JQY Chanukah Video

3. Despite detractors this can clearly be proven by both observation and learning the Nefesh Hachaim Shaar Daled (a foundational text of Yeshiva ideology)

4. perhaps after observing Lakewood driving one may be convinced that it would be advisable.

5. Credit must also be given to other early American Yeshivos such as Torah Vodaas and the Arrival of Alter Mirrers

6. this is most clearly seen in most of todays polemics being waged in the name of keeping the Mesorah of Rav Aharon.

7. Zev Eleff has an article on this.

8. along with some great commentary on materialism as a default alternative