Pages

Thursday, March 26, 2009

Does He Have A Rav?

One of the most commonly asked non-basic question that we get from people asking about guys for shidduch purposes is "Does he have a Rav?" Every time I get this question, I clarify first, "What do you mean?" Usually the answer is, "Does he have a specific rav he goes to for halachic (Jewish law) questions and for advice?" While I'm often tempted to ask why the assumption is that those two go hand in hand, I typically answer politely that the boy in question has a number of Rabbonim and Rabbeim whom he is prone to speaking to or asking questions of about different subjects. If the guy does have a particular Rav or Rebbe he is close with, I'll mention it, but I'm often struck by the surprise and shock on the other end* to the very idea that a guy will not have a particular Rav that he goes to for everything.

More than one such call has resulted in a discussion on the subject, but I remember in particular a young lady who was extremely troubled by the idea that a guy she had dated for a while and liked very much, and was considering dating again, did not have a single specific Rav. This young lady was extremely bright, well-spoken, and was a serious bas Torah and professional - not by any means a brainwashed flake. Yet she was hung up on the idea that a boy must have a specific Rav that he goes to, or it was problematic. Aseih l'cha Rav - make for yourself a Rav: Isn't that a basic concept? That a person should have a Rav that he essentially submits himself to?

Well, no. It is a nice thing to have if a person can find it, obviously, but especially today, as halacha and life have become more complex and the ability of a person who is becoming a Rav to grasp so many different and growing fields within halacha has become strained, it seems to be an unreasonable expectation to have of a thinking young man. Finally, there is a good, clear explanation of what seemed logical enough on its own, courtesy of Rav Aviner:
Q: Does the concept of "Get Yourself a Rav" (Pirkei Avot 1:6, 16) mean that you must have one Rabbi for everything?

A: "Get Yourself a Rav" is not an obligation. It is not stated in the Rambam or the Shulchan Aruch that one is obligated to have a Rav but it is exalted advice. If a man has a Rabbi, the Rabbi can direct and guide him. He helps to exalt him in a spiritual sense. But it is not an obligation. A person can therefore have more than one Rabbi. He can also have a Rabbi for all questions and issues except for one. For example, the Gemara in Shabbat (22a) writes that Rava followed his Rabbi - who was called "Rav" - in everything except three cases. There is also a concept called "Rabo Muvhak," i.e. a Rabbi from whom one has acquired the majority of his wisdom (see Bava Metzia 33a). Nonetheless, there is a halachah in the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh Deah 242:4) that it is forbidden for a person to give a halachic ruling or to establish a yeshiva without permission of "Rabo Muvhak." The exact wording is that one needs permission from one's foremost teachers – "Rabotav Ha-Muvhakim." But how can one have more than one "Rabo Muvhak" - after all a "Rabo Muvhak" is a Rabbi from whom one has acquired the majority of his wisdom?! The Shach explains there (#12) he has "Rabo Muvhak" in Torah, "Rabo Muvhak" in Gemara, "Rabo Muvhak" in Halachah, etc… We see from here that a person can have various Rabbis, each in a different area. The ideal is obviously for a person to have one Rabbi for everything so that he can have a unified system of thought and practice.
* Often by girls or mothers, much less often by fathers, interestingly.

19 comments:

  1. Interestingly, when i was dating, i went out with one boy who told me repeatedly that he had one "rav mehuvak" he went to for everything. His halachik questions, personal issues, any sort of problem that might arise in his life..he immediately turned to his rav. I found that very unappealing. I asked him if he ever first thought through the problem on his own. I am a believer in daas torah, but it is not to the exlusion of trying to learn/understand torah on your own first. Thats why G-d endowed us with these mental abilities, to be used, not just to meekly turn to someone else for all the answers.

    ReplyDelete
  2. As I understand it (based on my life and learning), it is preferable to have one or two rebbeim to whom you address your questions. One might, for example, have a rav for halachic issues and a different rav for hashkafic/personal issues.

    The idea of not having a rav at all, however, seems problematic to me for several reasons. One being that if there is no main authority to whom you turn with shailas it increases the likelihood of "shopping" for the answer you want; choosing whom to ask based on what you want to hear.

    A second issue, to my mind, is that the relationship that a person has with his rav is as important as the psakim he receives. Creating a kesher with a rav, taking time to talk, even when you don't have a pressing question, is vital. The sixth mitzvah in Rambam’s Sefer Hamitzvos is the injunction to associate with chachamim; he discusses the importance of being in their company, of really knowing them. Technically, you could get a psak from anyone. But having a rav means really knowing a rav, and making sure the rav really knows you—and this is incredibly important in and of itself.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Anon - Great comment.

    SJ - A couple different things there. Firstly, and most importantly:

    A second issue, to my mind, is that the relationship that a person has with his rav is as important as the psakim he receives. Creating a kesher with a rav, taking time to talk, even when you don't have a pressing question, is vital. The sixth mitzvah in Rambam’s Sefer Hamitzvos is the injunction to associate with chachamim; he discusses the importance of being in their company, of really knowing them. Technically, you could get a psak from anyone. But having a rav means really knowing a rav, and making sure the rav really knows you—and this is incredibly important in and of itself.

    Important point. I originally wrote this post differently, but changed it around - in the first draft, I quoted an important line a Rebbe I was close with from HS who stated that a person should find a Rav who cares primarily about what is best for *you*. The only way this is possible is if they know you well enough.

    The idea of not having a rav at all, however, seems problematic to me for several reasons.

    That's not the same thing as what I mean in the post. A person should certainly have Rabbonim whom he can trust and look to for guidance or psak. The point is that that need not be a single Rav for everything. Again in the first draft (grr :P ), I discussed "shopping around" - certainly, this is not proper. That does not preclude someone from knowing who to ask what - if you know the Rebbe you're close with is not necessarily a skilled posek, you should not be seeking out his psak. As a simple example, a guy might have a Rebbe from yeshiva with whom he is close. Even though this Rebbe has smicha, he is not a posek (even if he can give psak), and the talmid should be careful about seeking out psak from that Rebbe. [Aside: This was never an issue for me, as WITS Rabbeim do not give psak as I understand it, and OJ Rabbeim deferred to one of the Rabbeim regarding psak unless specifically asked on a personal level from a talmid.]

    Most often you'll end up finding something along the lines of what you describe in your first paragraph - one for psak (often a shul Rav; the transition many have made to asking Roshei Yeshiva can be either good or troubling - see a previous post discussing an interview with a number of Rabbonim about this) and one for advice (often a past Rebbe). Within those two realms, however, it might split further - a HS Rebbe a person is close with may be good for certain types of advice, but dealing with HS issues on a daily basis the talmid may find them to be less qualified than another later Rebbe in certain advisory capacities. The same can be true of psak (particularly when married) - my Rebbe specifically advised that the wife have her own Rav for certain personal issues. Similarly, if I have a normal daily shaila, I'll probably ask my local Rav. If I have a kashrus question, and the timing is good, I'll consider contacting my old Rav in Cleveland who deals more with Kashrus for the Star-K.

    It's more important that a person take the proper approach to asking shailos in terms of knowing who to ask what to - not for shopping around, but for most appropriate and knowledgeable psak or advice - than to get caught up in the idea of following a single Rav for every last thing. (And any Rav who a person is close with would likely - hopefully - say the same. The full quote from my Rebbe was: "Whatever you do, make sure to find a Rebbe or Rav who is a ba'al mussar; someone who cares most about what is best for you.")

    ReplyDelete
  4. Interesting and thought provoking topic. Thank you!

    ReplyDelete
  5. I'll be back...count on it.

    ReplyDelete
  6. one quick point

    SJ-
    all the positive things you mention about 'having a Rav' are probably true

    However, that bec one does NOT have one that all of your negative assumptions are true is highly insulting and more than a little judgemental.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Question: How many shoalim can a Rav have that he "knows" well enough as described in SJ's comment?

    Question: "I discussed "shopping around" - certainly, this is not proper. " What is your source for this assertion?

    KT
    Joel Rich

    ReplyDelete
  8. Joel - From 0 to many.

    Common sense, and the general idea that once one has a psak they should not then go and ask someone else the same shaila.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Maybe also people learn to go to a few specific people as they get older, like once they're married and move to a community. Where I live, most people trust the Rav of the community and would say he is their primary Rav when they have questions. But none of those people would have had such a thing before they were married and moved there.

    Other than that, I agree with SJ's points, but I don't think that just because someone doesn't have a specific Rav, he will then start shopping around for answers he likes. Also, the relationship one has with a Rav, like SJ said, is an important one, but if a guy doesn't have it, that doesn't make him a bad guy. Maybe he just hasn't come across the right Rav for him yet.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Common sense, and the general idea that once one has a psak they should not then go and ask someone else the same shaila.
    ====================
    Common sense based on what halachik source? I'm not asking about shopping, I'm asking about asking different rabbis different questions. (BTW the fact that the gemara discusses how to ask a second rav the same shaila implies that this was not a problem)
    KT
    Joel Rich

    ReplyDelete
  11. Just to clarify: my comment was not meant as a judgment against anyone who doesn't have a rav; it is not a question I ask or ever would ask in order to determine someone's character. However, I do think that it is something that every individual should consider for himself, and that having someone (or several someones) who you feel comfortable calling your rav is ideal. (Nor does this mean that you must necessarily ask every single question to that rav.)

    ReplyDelete
  12. Erachet - That's another thing: It *seems* that the people most stuck on this issue are young singles or established parents. The young singles make sense: This is how they've been educated, and they've grown up with parents who are established and ask shailos to their local Rav. The established parents also have their local Rav, and want to know that a prospective son-in-law has the same - perhaps forgetting that their current Rav was not always their Rav.

    And well said on the boy.

    Joel - Common sense is usually not from a Halachic source, though they usually tend to align. :)

    Asking the same shaila to multiple people seems to be frowned upon by Rabbonim, and most will refuse to give psak to someone who has already gotten a psak on the subject.

    And I think asking different Rabbonim different Q's is fine and not shopping. It depends on how the person goes about it more than anything.

    SJ - ...ideal

    Certainly, and that's what R' Aviner ends with.

    I'm more troubled by those who get caught up on the idea despite a reasoned explanation of why the boy does not have one. If the objective of the Q is to ensure that the boy seeks out proper Torah guidance, wouldn't the person be happy to know that the boy not only does so, but doesn't do so blindly and instead seeks out better guidance in a well-reasoned fashion? It is troubling when people get stuck on an easy "rule of thumb" and forget what the objective of it is.

    Hanan - You'll have to clarify the Q. :)

    If I have an everyday shaila, I'll ask the Rav of the shul we daven in. At this point, these are rare (helps to have worked in kitchens, though I sometimes have to remember that certain things are okay for a Rabim but not for a Yachid).

    Kashrus-specific shailos I'll either ask him, check online (Star-K's website is excellent), or contact a Rav in Cleveland who studied under R' Heinemann.

    Serach has a different Rav for her shailos.

    I have other Rabbeim and Rabbonim and even people without smicha to discuss other issues with.

    ReplyDelete
  13. another point-just cause a guy has a rav that he's close to, doesn't mean he's a good person in general...

    ReplyDelete
  14. Little Sheep - Absolutely. A couple of times, people have said at the end "what did I leave out", and I'll say "well, you didn't ask if he was a nice guy... or does he get angry easily, how is he when he's angry, what are his middos like in general, etc."

    ReplyDelete
  15. whats with guys having rabbis- girls should too. It is especially important for a married woman to have her OWN rav,for personal issues/questions that she feels comfortable with(hamaven aveen) and that is not necc. her husbands rav. I always say a rav can be like a specilist, one does not go to an oncologist if they have liver problems, rather they go to a pulmunalogist. The same holds true for a rabbi.

    ReplyDelete
  16. hehe love this post... we had that exact conversation. u should probably link to me :-)

    ReplyDelete
  17. Sorry, I got here a bit late, but this post/topic is important, so let me add my proverbial two cents.

    I believe that this whole thing is coming about because of the following. Certain people who teach/speak to young/women have hammered into them the fact that any men they are interested in must 'have a Rav'. They claim that that way if there is a problem in the marriage/relationship they could go to the Rav to complain and he can influence or order the man to do the right thing. They scare them with horror stories about men who 'have no Rav', and therefore there is no one that can be approached to talk to/order/influence them if a serious problem/conflict arises. I think this is preached by people like Rabbi Dr. Abraham J. Twerski as well, if memory serves me correctly (he may in fact be a/the leader in this).

    In a time when people regularly hear/read stories about agunas, witholding of gittin, various types of abuse, etc., this makes a big impression on the young/women who want to avoid such a fate, and they resolve to follow this advice.

    However, as you say, this approach is overly simplistic. It's not always easy to have the idealized 'relationship with a Rav' that these young girls seem to think is a basic norm in the frum community. Oftentimes the high quality Rabbonim are quite busy and hard to get hold of or close to, unless you are some type of macher, gevir, old friend/talmid, or member of their congregation. Lower level ones are easier to find, but not everyone is ready to subjugate themself to 'leadership' that may be less than adequate. Do they want some type of robot who has chosen an intelligent close-minded extremist for his leader, or would they rather have a thoughtful person who asks questions and is neither robotic, nor fanatical?

    ReplyDelete
  18. L - Mostly agreed. (R' Dr. Twerski part I don't. I never got that impression from his books or the couple things I've heard him give over; only to find good people to talk to, not specifically Rabbonim.)

    ReplyDelete