Collected Essays: Volume III
(The Littman Library of Jewish Civilization, 2020), by Haym Soloveitchik
Reviewed by Rabbi Reuven Chaim Klein (Rachack Review)
As can be expected from
Soloveitchik's previous work, the meticulous analysis and scholarly depth found
in this anthology offer invaluable perspectives on medieval Jewish
civilization, historical inquiry, and halachic discourse. As the reviewer
delved into its pages, he found himself immersed in a thoughtful exploration of
these complex topics, guided by Soloveitchik's expertise and clarity of
thought. This collection is not only informative but also thought-provoking, marking
it as an impressive resource for anyone interested in Jewish intellectual
history.
The first part of this book is
dedicated to analyzing the pietist phenomenon known as Chassidei Ashkenaz (associated
with Rabbi Shmuel HaChassid, Rabbi Yehuda HaChassid, and Rabbi Elazar Rokeach,
who were active in Germany in the 12th and 13th
centuries). In that part of the book, Soloveitchik delves into the intricate
world of Chassidei Ashkenaz, looking at the pietist ideologies and practices of
this elitist movement with a critical eye. In doing so, Soloveitchik
masterfully dissects the core tenets of their worldview, highlighting the
concept of retzon habore (“the will of the Creator”), which fuels
its adherent’s profound yearning to fulfill the Creator's “complete” will. This
is accomplished by following rigorous adherence to strictures above and beyond
those codified by mainline halacha. Within the realm of halacha, this ideology
gives way towards an inclination towards stringencies, coupled with an (over)emphasis
on the purity of thought (exemplified by their stringent prohibition on gazing
at women).
Moreover, Soloveitchik
intricately explores the possible evolution of Chassidei Ashkenaz thought, considering
whether or not there may be nuances between its various developmental stages or
differences between the ideas espoused by its above-mentioned intellectual
heroes.
Soloveitchik astutely examines
how the movement's ideas continued to reverberate throughout the broader
Ashkenazic world even after the collapse of
the movement proper. This is particularly seen in the case of
self-mortification and other forms of penance as rites of repentance. Additionally, Soloveitchik delves into the
intriguing interplay between Chassidei Ashkenaz and the Tosafist movement,
unraveling the complexities of the dynamic relationship between them.
In the context of his work on
Chassidei Ashkenaz, one of Soloveitchik’s more well-known contributions to
scholarship lies in his groundbreaking
insight regarding the seminal work commonly known as Sefer Chassidim. Soloveitchik’s
astute observation notes that the first 153 paragraphs of that book are actually
sourced in pietistic writings/teachings from outside the particular pietist
community of the Chassidei Ashkenaz.
Soloveitchik shows how the content of those paragraph actually diverges from
the core ideals of the Chassidei Ashkenaz movement (while sometimes retaining
their verbiage), at times even citing passages verbatim from Maimonides.
Soloveitchik's spirited exchanges with scholars who questioned his assumptions
about Chassidei Ashkenaz offer a fascinating glimpse into the scholarly
dialogue surrounding this controversial movement, as much of the materials
printed in this first section of the book detail the opinions of those who
disputed Soloveitchik’s assumptions about Chassidei Ashkenaz and how Soloveitchik replied to their arguments.
In the second part of this book, Soloveitchik embarks on a scholarly exploration
of the Jewish community in Provence (in modern-day Southern France),
particularly focusing on its revered rabbinic figure, the Raavad — Rabbi
Avraham of Posquières. In this section, Soloveitchik shows how even
though contemporary Talmudic scholars see the Raavad as primarily a critic of
Maimonides’ and Alfasi’s halachic magna opera, in earlier times the
Raavad’s legacy was shaped by his commentaries to the Talmud. Thus, Soloveitchik brings to the fore the multifaceted
legacy of the Raavad, shifting the spotlight from his role as a critic of
Maimonides (which only occurred as a sideshow to the Raavad’s main work, as he
only encountered Maimonides’ writings at the end of his fruitful life) to his
role as an independent and creative Talmudic commentator and Halachic decisor.
Much of the Raavad’s work and originality was overshadowed by the later work of
Nachmanides and his students, but Soloveitchik urges the reader to see the Raavad's
groundbreaking output for what it truly is. In doing so, Soloveitchik also shows
how the Raavad’s commentary differs from the monumental contributions of Rashi.
This section of the book also
contains a series of essays penned in response to criticism about how Soloveitchik framed Raavad’s relationship with
Geonic rulings and how the Latin legal terminology used in Provence may have
influence the Provencal sages’ way of looking at sureties in Halachic
discourse.
In the context of discussing
Provencal Jewry, the figure of the Meiri
emerges as a compelling subject of inquiry, and in a chapter dedicated to that
figure, Soloveitchik offers a critical description of Meiri’s Talmudic
methodology and his contribution to Talmudic study. Through Soloveitchik's sharp
lens, we gain a deeper appreciation as to how Meiri's voluminous Talmudic
commentary has been received throughout the ages and what led to it gaining
more prominence in the last century than it has ever held.
In discussing Talmudic commentaries, a recurring theme emerges from this
book: Soloveitchik's profound reverence and awe for Rashi as a commentator who
transformed the Talmud into an open book in a way that was unparalleled in the medieval
world. While acknowledging the contributions of other commentators, such as the
School of Mainz (printed in the ubiquitous Vilna Shas under the name “Rabbeinu
Gershom”) and the Raavad, Soloveitchik sees Rashi's contribution in shaping the
way Talmud is studied as entirely unmatched.
Another theme that runs like Ariadne's
thread throughout this collection of Soloveitchik’s
writings is the question of how and when historical data can be culled from
halachic literature. Unlike some scholars who view halachah as predominantly
shaped by the ideological leanings or even personal interests of its decisors,
Soloveitchik presents a compelling argument that halachah — like any legal
system — operates according to its own rules and considerations. Soloveitchik therefore
cautions against the tendency to "historicize" rulings by attributing
them solely to extra-halachic motives, emphasizing the necessity of identifying
a "smoking gun" in the form of unsound halachic reasoning that points
to the notion that the decisor is motivated by something other than purely
halachic thought before making such accusations. This evidentiary criterion,
which Soloveitchik terms the "angle of deflection," serves as a
guiding principle in much of his historical analyses, even when it is not
explicitly articulated.
Many of the essays in this
collection have already been published and critiqued by other scholars decades
ago. Within these pages, Soloveitchik
gracefully responds to some of those critiques, skillfully defending and
clarifying his positions. Often, he accomplishes this task with elegant
simplicity, by simply reproducing his original words verbatim while offering a
slight addition or modifications where necessary. He is also not afraid to
concede to his interlocutors, when he sees their arguments as compelling. This
dialogue with scholarly discourse not only enriches the reader's understanding,
but also underscores Soloveitchik's commitment to rigorous intellectual
engagement and his own legacy in the study of Jewish History.
As one of the preeminent Jewish historians of the medieval period,
Soloveitchik's scholarship is marked by a rare blend of academic rigor and
profound reverence for tradition. Hailing from one of the most illustrious
rabbinic dynasties and identifying himself with the Lithuanian Yeshiva
tradition, Soloveitchik navigates between these worlds, crafting erudite works
in eloquent English as befits his towering stature as a scholar. This reviewer
in particular has eagerly consumed Soloveitchik's previous volumes and essays, and
for him, the anticipation of future scholarship from the pen of this esteemed
octogenarian scholar is met with great excitement. Soloveitchik's contributions
continue to illuminate the corridors of Jewish intellectual history, leaving an
indelible mark on generations of scholars and readers alike.
