Following the Gedolim - or Not

Non-Chareidi religious Jews disagree with the Chareidi attitudes toward Gedolim. Here are two reasons why.

I was afforded an interesting opportunity last week, and I found it to be both informative and, in some ways, disturbing.

Talk show host Zev Brenner invited me to be a guest on his Saturday night “Talkline” radio program to discuss the recent Israeli Supreme Court decision that the IDF must begin drafting those Chareidim who previously received military exemptions as yeshiva students. One of the other guests was Rabbi Avi Shafran, the director of public affairs and spokesman for Agudath Israel of America.

Rabbi Shafran articulated the Chareidi position that far from shirking their responsibility to the nation, yeshiva students are, in fact, a vital part of the war effort, as their Torah learning is essential to Israel’s military success. More to the point, however, he repeatedly suggested that any textual evidence to the contrary was irrelevant, as the Chareidi community listens to its Gedolim (great scholars), and the extraordinary scholarship, understanding, and integrity of these Gedolim trumps any contrary position, no matter how outwardly compelling. In his words, “Any ideas that anyone else has can be brought to these Gedolim - and if they embrace them, kol hakavod [well done], and they will happen. But if they don’t embrace them for whatever reason, then that will be what the Chareidi community will continue to operate on.”

Rabbi Shafran repeatedly emphasized that he was not insisting that non-Chareidim listen to the Chareidi Gedolim; he only asked that the wider Israeli population understand that listening to Gedolim is essential to the Chareidi way of life, and that this way of life deserves to be respected.

I have been thinking about Rabbi Shafran’s position, and in what ways religious Jews who are not part of the Chareidi community disagree. I would like to mention two areas where, in my opinion, Orthodox Jews who are not Chareidi may find the Chareidi attitude towards Gedolim somewhat misguided.

Let me emphasize that as I only speak for myself, others may well disagree with much of what I write. I also do not pretend that this list is exhaustive; there are certainly other reasons that some find the Chareidi reverence for Gedolim objectionable. Of course, well-meaning members of the Chareidi world might suggest that I mischaracterized the Chareidi position, or misunderstood it - and since I am not Chareidi, I admit that it is not my place to determine whether they are right or wrong. I can only express my opinion as an outsider, without pretending to understand the Chareidi mindset from within.

The first distinction is typified by Rabbi Shafran’s comparison of the Gedolim to medical specialists. In explaining that we do not ascribe infallibility to great Torah scholars, he said, “Just like a doctor is not infallible, but you go to the best doctor to get the best advice, so Gedolim - of course they’re not infallible, they’re not popes. But we nevertheless go to them like we would go to a specialist in the field of medicine that we need a refuah [healing] for, we go to them for advice, and we accept their advice.” This position was also articulated by Rabbi Aharon Feldman: “Halachic opinions by, say, the Rambam, Vilna Gaon or Chazon Ish gain their authority simply from a universal recognition that their greatness and vast command of every aspect of Torah law, compared to our own, outweighs our opinion. This does not derive from any special mitzvah, still less from any belief that they enjoyed metaphysical inspiration. We are not sinners if we dispute their views - merely arrogant fools. To use an analogy, when faced with a medical decision we are not obligated to obey a specialist’s instruction if we feel that another procedure would be better. But if we decide to follow our flimsy medical knowledge against his, we are certainly fools.” (The Eye of the Storm, pp.185-186) Rabbi Feldman extends this implicit authority to the Gedolim of our time.

Ironically, the comparison to medical specialists, I believe, typifies the non-Chareidi attitude toward great Torah scholars more than it does the Chareidi position. Members of the Modern Orthodox and National Religious communities, while greatly respecting the most eminent Torah scholars, are typically willing to accept the independent decisions of their own rabbis, even if those rabbis are not among the greatest scholars of the generation. A talmid chacham who has real command of the material in question has the right and the ability to answer halachic questions - and is under no obligation to defer to the position of our Gedolim should they disagree.

On the other hand, it would indeed be foolhardy for people without the requisite knowledge and experience to decide complicated halachic questions on their own; this would be no different from deciding a medical question by looking it up on Google. Just as I need to find a skilled medical specialist when I am confronted with a medical issue, I need to ask my halachic questions to a qualified and competent Torah scholar… but that is a far cry from insisting that this medical professional’s opinion is worthless given that there are greater specialists in the world. Naturally, there may well be situations where even an expert doctor is stumped, and chooses to consult with one of the greatest experts on earth. This, however, does not disqualify him from deciding other questions in a manner different from the expert - or even disagreeing in the difficult case at hand. Expertise should be respected and carefully considered. Nevertheless, it is neither uniformly authoritative, nor invariably correct.

In other words, I need not insist that all important medical decisions rest exclusively in the hands of the the medical field’s biggest geniuses; it is not foolish to rely upon a less renowned yet eminently qualified expert. If this is true for medical knowledge, where there is likely only one correct diagnosis, it is more than doubly true for halachic questions, where different readings of the sources can lead to distinct yet equally valid halachic positions. The Chareidi reliance upon Gedolim, accordingly, tends to narrow the range of acceptable opinions within the Torah world in a manner unacceptable to those outside of the Chareidi community.

I think that the Chareidi attitude towards Gedolim is less comparable to the relationship between a layperson and a medical specialist, and more like the difference between someone who plays basketball in his driveway and members of the NBA All Star team. A decent high school player who actually believes that he can compete with LeBron James, Nikola Jokic, or Giannis Antetokounmpo is delusional - and a rabbi who imagines that his opinion holds weight in the face of a contrary position by the Gedolim is equally foolish.

This attitude is summed up well by Rabbi Shafran: “If those Gedolim feel that there is no grounds for compromise and that things need to continue exactly the way that they are currently for the good of klal Yisrael, that’s the position that Chareidim, myself included, will take - simply because this is the sine qua non of the Chareidi community, that we consider not sources, and not experiences, and not anecdotes, but the guidance of the einei haeida - the eyes of the congregation - the luminaries to whom we ascribe the greatest honors because of their selfless devotion to Torah, their brilliance, and their Torah attitudes… The buck has to stop there.”

This is a position which, I believe, many religious Jews find upsetting. It smacks of the attitude noted by John Henry Newman, when he spoke of a Roman Catholic bishop who said that, “In matters of faith he would believe a single Pope rather than a thousand Fathers, saints, and doctors [of the church].” (Gary Wills, Papal Sin, p.247) I am sure that all Chareidim would strongly reject this comparison; but people who live outside of the Chareidi world may not be quite sure why.

A second distinction is our differing beliefs about the practical knowledge of the Gedolim - not in Torah per se, but in the issues that confront the Torah community from the outside world. Rabbi Shafran said, “The Gedolim that are recognized in the Chareidi community are not afraid of anybody, and they’re not beholden to anybody, and they’re not influenced other than by sechel (logical thinking) and by valid arguments and by their Torah knowledge.” A similar and even more extreme position was articulated by Rabbi Feldman: “The distinction… between halachah and non-halachic matters is irrelevant to post-Talmudic opinions. We may decide to agree or disagree with them in either case. However, if we do decide to accept the halachic decisions of the poskim in each generation, then, by the same token, we should grant the poskim the same authority in every area, since their greatness in Torah enables them to make better decisions than we can make. We should consult them in any case where da’as Torah is generally consulted. So we may agree or disagree with the non-halachic decisions of the Chafetz Chaim, R. Chaim Brisker, or R. Chaim Ozer just as we may agree or disagree with their halachic decisions. There is no difference between one and the other. However, by the same token, there is no difference in the degree of one’s folly in either instance.” (ibid., p. 186)

While every knowledgeable Orthodox Jew will readily accept the incomparable greatness of the figures mentioned by Rabbi Feldman, those outside of the Chareidi community will be more reluctant to apply this same respect to the Chareidi Gedolim of today. In particular, Modern Orthodox and National Religious Jews will likely take issue with two specific points: first, that ignoring the opinion of the Gedolim in areas where they are not expert is foolish, and second, that the Chareidi Gedolim of today are truly informed enough about the world outside of the study hall that their piskei halacha are necessarily wiser than those who have less Torah knowledge.

To put the matter bluntly: halachic decision making is predicated upon both knowledge of Torah and a clear understanding of the situation about which there is a halachic or public policy question. Many of those who are not Chareidi sincerely doubt that the Chareidi Gedolim of today are sufficiently informed about crucial situations facing the Jewish people. 

In fact, most non-Chareidi religious Jews suspect that many Chareidi Gedolim are quite insulated, and receive information that is incomplete or even incorrect - and they often lack the mechanisms to learn the truth. There are countless stories (with video evidence) of someone being ushered into the presence of an elderly Gadol, who then is given the background by his ever present handlers - and then pronounces his opinion on the subject. This may take place even if the full facts of the case were explained in a cursory and subjective manner. Once again, I have no doubt that the Chareidi public will find this characterization insulting, and from their perspective, understandably so. Nonetheless, many religious Jews who are not Chareidi find this sad and troubling conclusion inescapable.

I have no interest in causing my Chareidi friends and neighbors distress; I know that they are well-meaning and they truly believe that following the Gedolim in the manner that they do is the proper way to live a Torah-centered life. My goal is merely to explain why some people outside of the Chareidi world think that these attitudes are misguided - and that acting differently is more in tune with an authentic Torah lifestyle.