We have previously discussed the rise of the Lithuanian Yeshivot. The analytic methods of the Tosafot of medieval France and Germany had developed in Lithuania and surrounding areas into a new way of life. Large yeshivot arose in the early eighteenth century, devoted to the in-depth study and contemplation of the Talmud. A new method and purpose of study was created; Pilpul. "Pilpul", which means "sharp" or "peppery", was a method of study in which a statement of the Talmud would be analyzed and re-analyzed from different perspectives. Why did one particular sage approach the topic at hand the way he did, while his colleague took a different approach? Can we connect each scholars' views with similar statements of his, showing a pattern of thought? Going on to the commentaries of later sages, why did they have different ways of understanding the passage? Were these differences of doctrine, or personal preferences? Going further, if one sage HAD approached the passage with the same approach as another, would he have come to the same conclusion as his colleague had? The purpose of this method was not to gain information or arrive at conclusions. A student asking his teacher for the final decision on a topic will be rebuked; "this is not a halachah class!" Rather, the deep immersion into the wisdom of the Talmud was in and of itself a way of immersing in the Mind of G-d. The Pilpul method was, and is, opposed by many.A single passage, rather than being studied for hours, was now being studied for weeks. In many Western and East European schools, it was seen as artificial. The scholars of these areas were studying Talmud so as to arrive at conclusions, and use these conclusions as the background for understanding and applying halachah. Rabbi Ovadia Yosef, himself a great sage, referred to Pilpul as Bilbul (confusion). Nevertheless, this approach spread to other areas, and today is the standard approach of the most Yeshivot around the world. Most Hassidim remain opposed to the Pilpul method, as do most Sepharadim. But the Lithuanian method of study became the norm in most Ashkenazic communities. A new appellation was born; Yeshivish. To be sure, it was, and is, completely Orthodox. But the emphasis now was less on piety and observance (although these remained), but on immersion in study. A shift occurred in these communities. The most respected rabbis were no longer the communal religious leaders, who dealt with the everyday life of the people, but rather the Rashei Yeshivah (Deans of the Yeshivah). To this day, when a crisis arises in Jewish life, the people turn to the heads of the great Yeshivot. On the one hand, this is the "Daat Torah" (Torah Mind) I have written about previously. On the other hand, the central figures were now essentially academicians; men who knew vast amounts of our sacred literature, in great depth, but were not connected to the concerns of the common man or woman. An analogy might be if in our Western Societies, we were to take away government responsibilities from our elected officials, and transfer those responsibilities to the department heads of great universities. Perhaps that would be an improvement. Perhaps not. The Yeshivish world was a way of life unto itself. The common working man supported it, respected it, but was not really a part of it. The gap between scholar and non-scholar became ever greater. The rise of Hassidism is often seen as a reaction to this approach. For the Hassid, sincerity, exuberance, spirituality were the essence of Judaism. Prayer held a higher place than study. To the Yeshivish world, that was seen as at least missing the mark, and perhaps bordering on heresy. But the Yeshivish world needed to deal with two challenges. From the East, Hassidism was fast winning over the Jewish masses with ecstatic Divine service, as well a more people-based community structure. From the West, the so-called Enlightenment was tempting the youth with promises of more depth of knowledge beyond Torah, as well as whole new ways of looking at life. How did the Yeshivot rise to this challenge? That will be my next post.