Hello Everyone,
Yesterday we studied another passage from עין איה which contained a remarkable insight from Rav Kook.
The shiur was based on this passage from masechet Shabbat:
תלמוד בבלי מסכת שבת דף נד עמוד ב
רב ורבי חנינא ורבי יוחנן ורב חביבא מתנו בכוליה דסדר מועד כל כי האי זוגא חלופי רבי יוחנן ומעייל רבי יונתן
This is apparently an innocuous, technical passage. Anyone who has studied Talmud, even at an elementary level, has come across passages in the Gemarah which clarify the attribution of statements to the correct source. The significance of attributing statements to their author cannot be overstated. In determining the Halacha there are rules which instruct us to rule like one particular rabbi as opposed to another. We need to know which rabbi is the author of which opinion. Furthermore there is a famous idea in Masechet Avot:
משנה מסכת אבות פרק ו משנה ו
…והאומר דבר בשם אומרו הא למדת שכל האומר דבר בשם אומרו מביא גאולה לעולם שנאמר (אסתר ב’) ותאמר אסתר למלך בשם מרדכי:
So at first glance, the passage in masechet Shabbat is a reiteration of an accepted notion. The names Yochanan and Yonatan are similar and easily confused and some people quote Rabbi Yochanan while some people attribute the same statements to Rabbi Yonatan.
Rav Kook makes an interesting observation. If the scholars of the Gemarah were interested solely in accuracy of the transmission of the laws then they would not have recorded doubtful attributions at all. In our suggyah the Gemarah is referring to a quartet of rabbis who studied סדר מועד. Three of the four rabbis are known with certainty, the fourth rabbi is either Rabbi Yochanan or Rabbi Yonatan. Why is the Gemarah concerned with recording both options for the fourth rabbi?
Rav Kook explains that the Talmud’s insistence on correctly linking statements to their authors is not a merely academic exercise. There is a deeper motivation for this accuracy. Rav Kook says that knowing individual halachot is not the ultimate goal for a scholar of Halacha. The most profound lessons are learned when the student knows, accurately, the entire corpus of an earlier sage’s teachings. Rabbi Yochanan ( to take the rabbi mentioned in our suggyah) is mentioned over 3000 times in the Talmud.[1] Rabbi Yochanan was certainly a master of Halacha. To know all of his rulings is a key to understanding Halacha. But there is another level to what Rabbi Yochanan can teach us. Rabbi Yochanan had a philosophy, a world view to teach us. His philosophy can be discovered by mastering all of his teachings. Rav Kook sees the collected teachings of all of our sages as mosaics.[2] The picture displayed in a mosaic is the product of having all of the necessary tiles. When we mistakenly attribute the teaching of Resh Lakish[3] to Rabbi Yochanan we deprive ourselves of the opportunity to discover the overarching philosophies of these two great teachers.
At one level it is enough to know a particular law; if something is not kosher and I refrain from eating it may not matter to me if I don’t know which Amorah ruled that this item may not be eaten. Rav Kook teaches that we need to strive to find the religious philosophy which guided a master to issue his rulings. The philosophy of Torah which guided Rabbi Akiva can be discovered by studying the entirety of his Halachic rulings.
After teaching us what he thinks is the highest aspiration for a student of the Talmud, Rav Kook takes this idea one step further. In our suggyah the Gemarah says that either Rabbi Yochanan or Rabbi Yonatan were members of a particular quartet of scholars. What value is there in a doubtful attribution? If I apply my metaphor of the mosaics, how can Rabbi Yochanan’s name complete the mosaic if the fourth member of the study group was Rabbi Yonatan?
Rav Kook says that this suggyah teaches us the value of doubtful knowledge. There is a Gemarah in Rosh Hashanah[4] that teaches us that when the court makes a mistake in determining the calendar, the determination is valid. The holidays celebrated on those mistaken dates are sanctified.
Why is this so? Why does Hashem accept our mistakes? Rav Kook says that Hashem is aware of our human limitations. He knows that we are subjective beings and that our human nature guides our Halachic decisions. Our sincere effort is what Hashem asks of us. We are not cold calculators. Our decisions may be wrong, they may lack pure objectivity but Hashem imbues them with holiness.
We may not know if particular laws were taught by Rabbi Yochanan or Rabbi Yonatan. But as we study their respective teachings, as we analyze them and form our mosaic of their teachings, the Torah which we derive will only be enhanced by the inclusion of even doubtful citations.
Thanks to everyone who participated in the shiur.
Stuart Fischman
[1] I checked on the Bar Ilan data base.
[2] This is my metaphor and I hope that it is a correct interpretation of Rav Kook’s teaching.
[3] Resh Lakish was Rabbi Yochanan’s student and study partner.
[4] Rosh Hashanah 25a