Tuesday, November 6, 2018

Chinuch

ויגדלו הנערים-Chazal point out that only after Yaakov and Esav become of age was it recognizable the differences between them.  Rav Hirsch says that Chazal are pointing out to us that the difference between Yaakov and Esav started in the lack of proper chinuch.  Already from in the womb it was obvious that Yaakov and Esav were of different natures.  It behooved Yitzchak and Rivka to realize that each one of the brothers required his own path of schooling, חנוך לנער על פי דרכו.  However, that wasn’t the case, rather each one went to the same school and was taught exactly in the same way.  Therefore, as they graduated from their days of school it was quite a surprise to everyone how twins who both went through the same schooling system could be so different.  In reality, this difference was there the whole time, but it wasn’t paid attention to.  Yaakov was fine with sitting in yeshiva learning all day but for Esav that didn’t work.  He didn’t have the sitzfleisch to sit and learn all day.  The lesson is that the chinuch of every child must be tailor-made to fit with his/her personality and strengths/weaknesses.  Of course, this is easier said than done because you can’t have a separate school for every child.  However, one could suggest that there should at least be two tracks, one for those that cut it and another for those that don’t.  But the mesoreh of yeshivos wasn’t to do like this.  I actually (surprisingly?!) will defend the position of the yeshivos.  The Mictav M’Eliyahu vil. 3 pg. 355-360 distinguishes between the Lithuanian yeshivos and the school of Rav Hirsch.  In the Rav Hirsch school where secular studies were encouraged, everyone emerged as a fine, frum Jew but they didn’t produce gedolei Torah.  On the other hand, in the Lithuanian yeshivos it was 100% learning.  There were many that ‘fell out’ of the Lithuanian schools and were lost to all the isms of the day.  However, they were able to produce gedolei Torah of the greatest caliber.  Rav Dessler seems to feel its worth it to lose some souls in order to produce the finest and best gedolei Torah.  The question obviously is do you agree with Rav Dessler’s assertion and #2 shouldn’t it (at least in today’s day and age) be possible to be have the best of both worlds?

3 comments:

  1. It's not such a simple question as schooling more a question of society. The lithuanian society was very focused on learning. And I don't think the drop outs were necessarily less learned. They studied literature instead. Also Gedolei Yisrael are not made by Yeshivos (maybe helped), they are gifts from Hashem (see Rav Shwab in "These and Those"). However the real question is how the average man relates to learning. Even if I do not become a Gadol is my learning woth something? Of course. The only dispute with the Hirschian system should be that someone (even the average joe) could have been greater in torah in the lithuanian system than he would have otherwise.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I also find it hard to believe that yitzchak wasn't mechanech properly. I actually thought that the reason why yitzchak asked eisav to go hunting was so he could show eisav how much he valued his talents and how they could be used in the context of the service of Hashem.

    ReplyDelete
  3. On point two, take it up with the Rabbiner.
    On point one,of course one put in a place that encourages gedolei torah will have a much greater chance of reaching his potential than one who isn't. And the dispute you outlined is exactly Rav Dessler's point. I agree that those that fell out weren't because of lack of intellectual abilities, I am just drawing a parallel of the dangers of a seperate schooling sytem.

    ReplyDelete