<HTML>Rabbi Selavan writes:
> There are seforim who have "predigested" Maharal's thought for the
> uninitiated, and on a higher level, as mentioned, Pachad Yizchak by Rav
> Hutner.
Of course, it is easier to grapple with new ideas by coming at them from
a framework that we are already at home in. But I wouldn't call that
"predigestion." Nourishment that doesn't require digestion may be
necessary when the patient is unconscious. But healthy people don't walk
around with IV's. They do their own digestion. When they don't, all sorts
of long term physical problems ensue.
R. Hutner is not inherently a "simpler" thinker than Maharal. He may be
more accessible to many of us because he is closer to us. He does not
"predigest" Maharal but often "works him over" (ubergearbeit); he shows
you what someone in our time can do with Maharal. I read a great deal of
Maharal before I ever opened a Pahad Yitzhak. R. Hutner did not so much
repeat specific statements of Maharal to me as he shed light on Maharal in
general.
> Consider that no one would teach advanced chemistry or math in such
> fashion, even though all the words seem to be in English, because of the
> depth of meaning and layers of understanding implicit in every term.
In math or science there is no impediment to attaining fluency without
real comprehension, because you are dealing with symbols that are
manipulated rather than understood. What it's all "about" is a conundrum
for philosophers, not for people who just want proficiency. Many
mathematicians and scientists think such concern is a waste of time,
because the philosophers have trouble arriving at a clear conclusion.
Mahashava, by contrast, does bring us into relationship with the real
world of experience. The challenge of Maharal is thus more like that
presented by difficult poetry or by the philosophical categories of Hegel.</HTML>
