In his treatise Nefesh ha-Ḥayyim, the outstanding Russian rabbinic scholar and educator Ḥayyim of Volozhin (1749–1821) presented a kabbalistic theology of Judaism. In his review of Avinoam Fraenkel’s English translation of this work, Alan Brill writes:

In contrast to ḥasidic thinking, Nefesh ha-Ḥayyim situates Torah study over prayer and piety (without, of course, rejecting either).The most famous idea from Nefesh ha-Ḥayyim is about the talmudic obligation to study Torah . . . “day and night.” . . . [According to] Nefesh ha-Ḥayyim, the Talmud’s intent is that one should maximize the actual time spent studying because of study’s mystical effect on the cosmos. Most contemporary yeshiva students do not know that the source for this approach is the Zohar [the principal work of kabbalah], not the Talmud. . . .

The greater availability of Nefesh ha-Ḥayyim [in English] will correct the widespread [and] mistaken view that its author, and the opponents of Ḥasidism in general (known as Misnagdim), advocated Talmud study without concurrent emphasis on kabbalah, the attainment of moral perfection, and worship. . .

Nefesh ha-Ḥayyim has not played a large role in American Jewish thought or in the [highly influential work] of the great scholar of Jewish mysticism Gershom Scholem. However, the work was translated into French in 1986 by Benno Gross and has played a significant role in modern French thought, where it has been used to derive Jewish ideas of cybernetics and semiotics. In several of his essays, the French-Jewish philosopher Emamnuel Levinas cites Nefesh ha-Ḥayyim to explain the need to transcend the self for infinite confrontation with divine will.

On Tuesday, a Hizballah drone attack injured three people in northern Israel. The next day, another attack, targeting an IDF base, injured eighteen people, six of them seriously, in Arab al-Amshe, also in the north. This second attack involved the simultaneous use of drones carrying explosives and guided antitank missiles. In both cases, the defensive systems that performed so successfully last weekend failed to stop the drones and missiles. Ron Ben-Yishai has a straightforward explanation as to why: the Lebanon-backed terrorist group is getting better at evading Israel defenses. He explains the three basis systems used to pilot these unmanned aircraft, and their practical effects:

These systems allow drones to act similarly to fighter jets, using “dead zones”—areas not visible to radar or other optical detection—to approach targets. They fly low initially, then ascend just before crashing and detonating on the target. The terrain of southern Lebanon is particularly conducive to such attacks.

But this requires skills that the terror group has honed over months of fighting against Israel. The latest attacks involved a large drone capable of carrying over 50 kg (110 lbs.) of explosives. The terrorists have likely analyzed Israel’s alert and interception systems, recognizing that shooting down their drones requires early detection to allow sufficient time for launching interceptors.

The IDF tries to detect any incoming drones on its radar, as it had done prior to the war. Despite Hizballah’s learning curve, the IDF’s technological edge offers an advantage. However, the military must recognize that any measure it takes is quickly observed and analyzed, and even the most effective defenses can be incomplete. The terrain near the Lebanon-Israel border continues to pose a challenge, necessitating technological solutions and significant financial investment.