Through a Mirror Clearly
Once again, I’m doing a book review. This time of one of Rav Hillel’s books, אפקלריא דנהר”א Aspekluria D’nahara. This is Rav Yaakov Hillel’s commentary on the Rashash’s work Rehovot HaNahar. Currently only the first volume is in print. I have no idea how many volumes are planned.
First let me say a piece about Rehovot HaNahar. In Sefer Nahar Shalom on page 32a their are a series of questions from the Hakhamei of Tunis and the Rashash’s replies to their questions. One of their questions what how the Rashash arrived at his understanding of the Eitz Haim and what other works he relied upon. The Rashash replied that he relied upon only the Kitvei HaAri. Further to his response he said that he would send them a short pamphlet called “Rehovot HaNahar” which would lay out the foundational principles that he found throughout the Eitz Haim(and the rest of the Kitvei) that would enable them to understand the Kitvei has he had. Regarding sefer Rehovot HaNahar, Rav Kaduri said, “You can know all of the Kitvei HaAri Baal Peh with it’s meforshim. Until you have learned Rehovot HaNahar, you have not learned Kabbalah.” For this reason some Kabbalistic Yeshivot even start their students with that.
Coming back to Rav Hillel’s book. The first volume is 253 pages long. It covers only the first two and half pages of Rehovot HaNahar. So far I haven’t found a wasted word. Rav Hillel combines his enormous knowledge of Kabbalah along with his excellent teaching skills and superb writing style to fully elucidate the many complex issues that the sefer discusses. He has broken the sefer into three Simanim(chapters). Here are my translations of the chapter headings from the table of contents:
- Chapter 1- In it shall be explained that the shattering[of vessesls] was in [the aspect] of width, and in the particulars not in the general.
- Chapter 2- In it shall be explained what were the various aspects that came forth in the world of Nekudim and what were the aspects that were shattered
- Chapter 3- In it shall be explained the matter of clarification and rectification, and what is clarified and rectified.
These are all key foundations to the understanding of the Kabbalah, and Rav Hillel does and excellent job of laying them out and making them accessible. The commentary is broken into two pieces. נהרא ופשתא Nahara UPashsta which is a line by line interpretation and explanation of the text itself and מעמקי הים Mamkei HaYam which looks much more indepth(Iyun) at the various issues and brings his own special insights into the text.
As great as the text is, I would say that the book is worth it just for the introduction. He gives there a fairly in depth explanation of the four basic foundations that the RaShaSh bases his entire system on, and that the Ari himself, according to the RaShaSh and Rav Yaakov Hillel, bases his entire Kabbalah on. While his explanation is in depth it is also basic enough that a person can easily grasp these profound concepts.
Shalom Rav Tzadok (k”h): Do you know if the GR”A or Rav Chayyim Volozhiner had the Rehovot HaNahar?
The Gra is doubtful He predeceased the Rashash by some twenty years, and I am not sure that Rehovot HaNahar was published widely until after his Petira. It is entirely possible That the Volozhiner did have it but I am in no way certain.
I have the GR”A’s year of p’tira (from Etkes) as the common year 1797. The Rashash’s p’tira was 1777.
Whoops got them backwards. I’m not always the greatest with dates. Still if I’m not mistaken the earliest publication of Rehovot HaNahar, was in 1806 which would have put it after the petira of the Gra.
Though since the Gedolim of the Europe, the East and North Africa wrote back and forth the possibility always exists that a handwritten copy was sent to the Gra. Especially given the high regard in which the Rashash was held within his own life. Though unless someone has found such a copy amongst the Gra’s things, it would be impossible to say.
HaRav Yaakov Hillel Shelit”a has the most beautiful and clear writing style of anyone since the Rambam IMHO. It is unbelievable! May Hashem lengthen his days in good and his years in comfort, Amen!
Hacham,
Rabbi Hillel is, indeed, a treasure but the comparison to the Rambam is way off.
First, he doesn’t write the sefarim. The ideas are his, he edits them, and they are based on his shiurim but the actual writing is done by a talented ghost writer/student.
Second, and this is a small critique on the Sefer, clarity requires conciseness. There is something wrong if a commentary and elucidation of a “pamphlet” (the rechovot is very short) requires multiple volumes.
Do you mind if I ask how you know that Rav Hillel doesn’t write his won books? Personally I had never heard that, and some of the works that he has written were done when he was still fairly young. Galei HaYam for instance.
Whoever writes his books has a very distinct and beautiful writing style.
I used to know the name of the writer. (I will try and get you his name). He definitely wrote his earlier works. It is the m
….,it is the more recent works on which he has acquired some help. The vayashov hayam are based on his shiurim and I am sure he edits everything very well. I certainly don’t mean to take anything away from him.
It doesn’t take away from him. Rav Benayahu has a team of people who help him write every sefer.
I thought it was Rav Yaakov Hillel’s son Rabbi Shalom Hillel who had been helping him.
R. Hillel gives the recording of his lectures to an assistant, who writes them up. The writer consolidates three cycles of lectures into printed form, which R. Hillel carefully reviews. More than that, R. Hillel edits, adds, removes, and is mechadesh a lot in the process of editing, so that the final form is probably quite removed from what he received. I do not know if it goes back to the editor for rewriting, but probably the editor puts in the hand-written corrections. I heard this from someone close to the Rav. I personally have worked on several short pieces written by R. Hillel, and can attest that he is a beautiful writer.
Since I am not sure they want this publicly known, I prefer to remain anonymous.
As for the comment above, “clarity requires conciseness” – that would apply to the Rashash’s sefer itself, I imagine. On the other hand, true depth requires elucidation – at times, lengthy. (Remember the Arizal’s statement on relating his dream on the mystery of Bilaam’s donkey.)