Tuesday, February 3, 2026

Between Frankfurt and Tzfas -- Boruch Clinton

linked post to Boruch Clinton


It should surprise no one when I note that among Jews – even Torah-loyal Jews – there have always been significant disagreements. Even such seemingly basic texts as Rambam’s thirteen principles have long been the subject of dispute. Safely navigating these disputes can be a challenge. The question I’d like to address in this article concerns whether it’s possible for an individual or community to adopt a philosophical system with a clear and reliable tradition even though it stands at odds with what has become a widely adopted orthodoxy.1

Specifically, I’d like to explore embracing Rabbi S.R. Hirsch’s views on the goals and impact of mitzva observance as opposed to those of the “Tzfas” interpretation of the Zohar and other related works. The differences between these two world-views are far more than purely theoretical and stand close to the very core of how we see our relationship with G-d and the way we approach mitzvos and tefila. Let’s begin by mapping out the key differences.

Hirsch on Mitzvos

Rabbi Hirsch thought of Torah and mitzvos as practical tools created to help us grow into perfect human beings striving to build and maintain perfect communities. He consciously and explicitly avoided any theosophical discussions (or, in other words, any discussion of how performing a mitzva might have some magical effect on either the physical or spiritual world), apparently considering the possibility as a waste of precious time and a distraction from our real goal. Man’s purpose, in Hirsch’s view, is not to see G-d, but to learn to see the world through G-d’s eyes. Why should we care what happens beyond our sphere of knowledge when many very real responsibilities lie waiting for our attention?

Thus, for example, the purpose of the Temple offerings is not to mechanically change (or “fix”) the universe, but to dynamically change ourselves by absorbing the many profound lessons taught by the avoda’s complex symbolic details.

This is nicely illustrated in the fourteenth letter of Hirsch’s Nineteen Letters, where he detailed how each category of Temple service was meant to impress particular thoughts upon us: “The aron represented the concept that the Torah is G-d-given; and the menorah and shulchan, the concept that the physical and mental faculties needed for implementation of the Torah are G-d-given, too.” Individual elements of the avoda served unique educational roles, inspiring our “…consecrating to G-d our life (zerikas ha-dam), our sentiments (ketorus) and, indeed, our entire personality (olah) by fulfilling the Torah.” In the same letter, Hirsch similarly describes prayer as a “cleansing of the thoughts and of the heart” rather than an expression of power.

continue