How Chareidie "Gedoilim" Systematically Destroyed the Legacy of the Great Harav Avraham Yitzchok Kook ז"ל

Harav Kook z"l with Rav Chaim Sonnenfeld z'l

Over the years, I have written about how Gedoilei Hador, who preached and practiced "machsom lefee" ... to refrain from talking "loshon harah" against anyone, .....looked away and actually killed "be'yadyim" the reputation and legacy of a "Malach Elokim" a "Tzaddik Yesoid Oilom" Harav Hatzaddik Hagoen Avraham Yitzchok Ha'Cohein Kook זצ"ל . 

In addition, early Chareidie publishers, and even the later ones like Artscroll totally erased and rewrote seforim and biographies that mentioned Rav Kook in any way because of their twisted political agenda!

How many know that Rav Kook z"l was the Mesader Kiddushin by both Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach z"l and Rav Eliyashiv?
Artscroll has autobiographies of these gedoilim and reading the books you would never know that.

How many know that the Kohein for Rav Shmuel Auerbach's Pidyan Habein was none other than Harav Kook z"l?

Not only that, Gedoilei Hador from our generation have already convinced today's naive young generation the perpetual lie that  Harav Kook z"l, was rejected by Chareidei Rabbonim in his own lifetime.
One cannot mention Harav Kook z"l in any context in any Charedie Bais Medrish or shul!

Enter Eitam Henkin, may G-d avenge his soul, who before his brutal death "al kiddush Hashem" documented the lies, distortions, and outright despicable behaviors in a detailed sefer!  

(Hat tip: Frumfollies)

I will take the liberty to lift some excerpts and quotes for those too busy to read the entire Henkin PDF file!


Rabbi Henkin hy"d, documents the fact that the Historical Revisionism of the writings and life of Harav Kook z"l was perpetrated by the Families of Rav Kook’s very own Talmidim.

I will name three Gedoilie Hador that were Talmidim of Harav Kook z'l; three that had the highest respect and reverence to their Rebbe but whose children and grandchildren chose to change and rewrite their ancestors seforim so that it would suit their twisted warped shitas for ideological purposes.

1. Rav Yitzḥak Arieli

Rav Yitzḥak Arieli, was the author of ‘Einayim La-Mishpat (1896–1974). 
In the Introductions to the early volumes of ‘Einayim La-Mishpat, published by Rav Arieli between 1936 and 1948, he acknowledges the deep influence of Rav Kook during the sixteen years in which they were close, as well as the importance of his own role in the establishment of Yeshivat Mercaz HaRav.

And yet, in 2006, several descendants of Rav Arieli published a new edition of ‘Einayim La-Mishpat on Berakhot, omitting the end of the introduction just quoted above. Moreover, they appended a biography of Rav Arieli to the Introduction with no reference whatsoever to Rav Kook or Yeshivat Mercaz HaRav. 

Please see the PDF in its entirety to appreciate the outright perfidy of these descendants! 

2. Rav Mordechai Ilan

 In 1982, Rav Ilan’s sons, headed by Rav Yaakov David Ilan, released his work Torat Ha-Kodesh—the second version, Volumes 1 and 2.

 In the Sefer’s forward, the sons provided a short biographical sketch of their father. 

It describes how he learned with Rav Shlomo Hyman, Rav Ḥayyim Ozer Grodzenski, and the author of Marḥeshet. It then immediately skips to “his marriage and arrival in Eretz Yisrael, and entering the house of his illustrious father-in-law Rav Yitzḥak Arieli…” with no mention at all of Yeshivat Mercaz HaRav or Rav Kook, nor of Ohel Torah or Rav Herzog. 

Several lines earlier, the sons mention that their father published his book “with the encouragement and approval of the gedolei ha-dor of that time, Rav Isser Zalman Meltzer and the Brisker Rav, OBM.” 

Rabbis from a different circle, who were also considered gedolei ha-dor by Rav Ilan, disappeared without a trace.

 In addition, several passages authored by Rav Ilan himself were omitted. 

A comparison between the Introduction to the 1982 edition—termed the “Introduction from the First Edition”—and the actual Introduction to the 1949 edition reveals that the final third had been left out. 

In it, Rav Ilan describes how some of the topics in his book were reviewed “before the Gedolei Torah of the Holy City of Jerusalem”: 

"Several topics were discussed and elucidated through collegial Torah argumentation in the centers of Torah in which I sat during the compilation of this work. This is the great yeshiva, the central institution, Yeshivat Mercaz HaRav, whose founder is the great rabbi, the Gaon, our strength, Master of Israel, Rabbi AY HaCohen Kook, OBM, "

3. Rav Yitzḥak Schulzinger

Now we come to the most drastic example of a man’s life and works being completely recast by his sons. 

Rav Yitzḥak Schulzinger was born in Siemiatycze, Poland, in 1904. As a youth, he learned in the Radin Yeshiva. He made aliyah in 1924 and learned in Mercaz HaRav for ten years, receiving semikha from Rav Kook and Rav YM Charlap.

 In the winter of 1934 he married and became the rav of Kfar Ganim. 

In 1935, we find his approbation on the compilation Mi-Peninei Ha-Rambam alongside those of Rav Kook and Rav Charlap. 

 Rav Schulzinger published Imrot Yitzḥak on Bereshit—a compilation of weekly lectures delivered during his tenure as rabbi in Haifa. 

In the front of the book, alongside his semikhot from Rabbis Kook, Charlap, and Abba Yaacov Borochov, he published approbations from Rav Charlap; Rav Yitzḥak Arieli; Rav Shalom Natan Raanan, the son-in-law of Rav Kook and director of Yeshivat Mercaz HaRav; and the Chief Rabbis of the time, Rav Herzog and Rav Ben Zion Meir Ḥai Uzziel. It even included a letter from the director of the Chief Rabbinate’s office, Rav Yaacov Barukh. 

In his Introduction (p. 2), Rav Schulzinger describes how:

 "I was fortunate to bask in the holy shadow of our teacher, the holy light of Israel, crown jewel of his generation, my master and teacher, Rabbi of all Israel, The first Chief Rabbi in Eretz Yisrael, the great Gaon, Rabbi AY HaCohen Kook, OBM, the priest and judge of the Holy Place […] Our teacher OBM led and judged the entire nation righteously, dedicating his life for what is just and viewed favorably by the entire nation […] For many years I was privileged to pour water on his holy hands, to listen to his teachings on halakha, aggada, musar, theology, and esoterica. And all of it was delivered ‘from the mouth of the High Priest in holiness and purity…"

 Further on, Rav Schulzinger continues to praise Yeshivat Mercaz HaRav and to quote the teachings of Rav Kook.

 Here too, however, the biography of Rav Schulzinger, his connection to Rav Kook’s circle, and his book, published just seven years before his death, were not enough to save him when his sons proceeded to get involved with his life and writings. 

In Bnei Brak, in 1974, fifteen years after his death, a second publication of Imrot Yitzḥak was released by his sons.

In the Introduction, Rav MM Schulzinger publicized a biography of his father, in which he describes at length how his father learned in the yeshivot of Europe, mainly in Radin, where he incurred the favor of the Chofetz Chaim. He continues at length, quoting from the Introduction to Imrot Yitzḥak and from a letter his father received from Rav Naftali Tropp. Yet when he reaches the year 1924, when his father came to Israel and entered Mercaz HaRav to learn under Rav Kook, not a word is mentioned, other than this laconic sentence:

 “And he learned in Jerusalem for ten years until he married.”

 The son makes no mention of, nor even hints at, which yeshiva his father learned in, whom he learned from, which teachers he was close to, who gave him semikha, who gave approbations to his books, and whom he valued most over all his other teachers. 

Afterword:

Over the course of this article, we have surveyed blatant examples of how descendants, firmly grounded in the Charedi world of our time, dealt with the fact that their ancestors were, in their own generation, personally, and sometimes ideologically, connected strongly to Rav Kook, his circle, and Yeshivat Mercaz HaRav. Sometimes, they took relatively minor steps, such as omitting approbations from republished books. In some cases, they took bolder actions, such as eliminating important biographical details of their fathers’ histories. And in other cases, as we have seen, they took drastic measures to interfere with the actual bodies of work that appeared in print.

This behavior is consistent with the general attitude towards revisionism as an accepted historiographical tool in the Charedi world. 

It arises from the combination of a desire to maintain ideological hegemony in which little legitimacy is accorded to modernity in general, and to the State of Israel in particular, with an accepted norm that prefers the bending of historical details to pedagogical concerns.

 Yet, on the other hand, one can still wonder: 

What drives these descendants, in so many instances, to distance themselves from the fundamental paths of their ancestors, to the point where they are unwilling to lay out the facts as they occurred, and making it impossible to relate to the fathers?