Rabbi Dr. Norman Lamm, Zichrono L’Vracha

I had always valued  the importance of studying worldly knowledge along with the study of Torah. But I had never crystallized exactly what the relationship between the two was aside from a deep feeling that worldly knowledge was an important part of life. I felt that ignoring or minimizing it would be at our own peril. 

Rabbi Lamm provided that connection in his seminal work, Torah U’Mada. It was clear from his introduction that he too had some questions about that connection.  And since Torah U’Mada (TUM) was the motto and logo of YU (Yeshiva University), the institution he presided over, he took it upon himself to define that concept as best as humanly possible.. He believed that TUM should mean more than simply having the two disciplines in the same building. (Which is how Rav Hershel Schachter characterized it when Rabbi Lamm approached him about his thoughts.) 

It was with his great intellect and intellectual honesty that he developed severall models uopon which Torah U’Mada could be based. All of which resonated with me. 

In the attempts to get as wide a range of opinion on the subject he asked for input from several prominent Orthodox thinkers. One of whom was my own Rebbe, Rav Ahron Soloveitchk. Who did a masterful job in providing his own perspective in two essays on the subject. 

Sadly Rabbi Lamm’s book was not well received by the rest of the Yeshiva world. (Not that YU was ever given respect by the right. But that is another subject.) 

One of TUM’s harshest critics were adherents of Rav Shamshon Raphael Hirsch’s Torah Im Derech Eretz (TIDE). They had their own reasons for asserting the importance of studying Mada and did not want people to confuse it with TUM - which they rejected. 

That had always bothered me since he actually included TIDE as one of his models although admitting that it was not a perfect fit - preferring another model he felt more closely followed his philosophy. Personally I see them as two versions connecting Torah to Mada - each being a legitimate approach (Elu V”Elu - if you will). But I digress.

Even though he was educated in one of their Yeshivos (Torah Vodaath) before moving on to become a student at YU, (or perhaps because of it) Rabbi. Lamm was a controversial figure to the world of the right. Aside from their rejection of TUM, he was viciously attacked for a variety of other reasons. For me, two of the most memorable were from Philidelphia Rosh HaYeshiva,  Rav Elya Svei and Telshe Rosh HaYeshiva, Rav Mordechai Gifter.

Rav Svei had some choice words for Dr. Lamm about a speech accusing him of calling right wing Yeshiva students cavemen. Which was a gross mischaracterization of what Rabbi Lamm had said about them.

Rav  Gifter strongly criticized Rabbi Lamm for permitting ‘gay clubs’ in his alma mater. (R’ Gifter had attended YU as a student.) Rabbi. Lamm’s response was as follows: 

Since YU had become non-sectarian so that it could qualify for government funding, he had to follow their rules. Or in the alternative shut down the school for lack of funding. Rav Gifter felt he should have shut the school rather than tolerate any form gay activity.

But no one questioned his loyalty to the school and his natural ability to lead it, both intellectually, religiously, and financially. Rabbi Lamm was a Talmid Chacham, a scholar, and widely respected pulpit rabbi even before he accepted the leadership role at YU. A brilliant thinker, a consummate speaker, and a magnificent fundraiser. 

After taking the job as President of YU, he brought it from a serious deficit to a surplus by the time he retired at age 75. He gave the position the intellectual and religious heft it needed to be both a Yeshiva and a university. I truly admired him and will forever be grateful for what he has given me. 

Rabbi Lamm was a towering giant of great intellect, whose dominance and influence on the world of Torah U’Mada has yet to be matched. Yehi Zichro Baruch.