Presence

One of the two books I took to shul on Yom Kippur was Halakhic Man, by R. J.D. Soloveitchik (the other was Yosl Rakover Talks To God, by Zvi Kolitz). This was my first time making it past the first few chapters of this book (I made sure to look up words like noetic beforehand).

For the most part, the thesis of Halakhic Man can be summed up with this quote (pg. 24):

The foundation of foundations and the pillar of halakhic thought is not the practical ruling but the determination of the theoretical Halakhah. Therefore, many of the greatest halakhic men avoided and still avoid serving in rabbinical posts. They rather join themselves to the group of those who are relcrant to render practical decisions. And if necessity - which is not to be decried - compels them to disregard their preference and to render practical decisions, this is only a small insignificant resposibility which does not stand at the center of their concerns.

The theoretical Halakhah, not the practical decision, the ideal creation, not the emprical one, represent the longing of halakhic man.

In other words, the pinnacle of Judaism, according R. Soloveitchik, is not the shul rabbi, but the Rosh Yeshiva. Of paramount importance in Judaism is the realization/actualization of the halakhic norm, as opposed to the ethical ideal. God's Presence descends to this world not through the implementation of justice, but through the structuring and creation of a judicial system.

While I strongly sympathize with the existential aspect of R. Soloveitchik's formulation, the overtly rationalistic tone rubs me the wrong way. I am more inclined to a theory that favors the ethical/practical over the theoretical/normative. I find it hard to accept that simply by theorizing a legal system one is . Whatsmore, I think the text of the Torah supports this.

Moshe Rabbeinu is the Halakhic Man, par excellence. His role, as detailed throughout the Torah and Midrashim, was to communicate the halacha to the people. His level of prophecy, of Divine communication, has greater than any other individual's thoughout history, not only in it's closeness, but in terms of it's normative status. Moshe, however, was divorced from the practical application of the Law. Yisro, upon observing the legal process his son-in-law had set in place, advised Moshe to withdraw from the practical side of Halakha. The division created by Yisro is clearly a division between the theoretical and practical aspects of the Law (if I did not write about this previously, I should have, and will). The court system set up by Yisro (not to be confused with the seventy Elders/Zekanim or the Sanhedrin) was to adjudicate actual cases, leaving Moshe free to theorize the Law.

When it came, however to actually bringing the divine presence down among the people, Moshe failed. At Mei Merivah, Moshe missed his chance at doing just this: "Because ye believed not in Me, to sanctify Me in the eyes of the children of Israel, therefore ye shall not bring this assembly into the land which I have given them." (Num. 20:12). Despite the fact that Moshe had done more than anyone else in terms of actualization of halakhic norms, he is still denied entry into the land where those norms would be put into practice.

It has been suggested elsewhere that the approach of R. Soloveitchik in Halakhic Man is inherently galus-oriented, as it lacks a practical context of implementation (no political or governmental body able to carry out the Law), as opposed to the philosophies of R. Kook, which were inherently practical from the beginning owing to their connection with the state of Israel. Perhaps this is the nature of Moshe's punishment; as close as he was to God, he was unable to manage a practical application of the halacha (many other aspects of his identity seem to fit with this theory, for example his withdrawal from his wife, relationship with the people, etc.). When it came time to enter the land and actually implement the system that would allow the divine presence to "dwell amongst them in their impurity" the Halakhic Man found he had nothing left to offer.

(This last part connecting Moshe's denial of entrance to the Land of Israel is speculation; a good question is that Moshe was instrumental in building the Mishkan/Mikdash, which housed the divine presence while the Jews were exiled in the desert. The depiction of Yisro's advice as a distinction between theoretical and practical is, in my opinion, the correct understanding of the text.)