(א) בֶּן זוֹמָא אוֹמֵר, אֵיזֶהוּ חָכָם, הַלּוֹמֵד מִכָּל אָדָם, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (תהלים קיט) מִכָּל מְלַמְּדַי הִשְׂכַּלְתִּי כִּי עֵדְוֹתֶיךָ שִׂיחָה לִּי. אֵיזֶהוּ גִבּוֹר, הַכּוֹבֵשׁ אֶת יִצְרוֹ, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (משלי טז) טוֹב אֶרֶךְ אַפַּיִם מִגִּבּוֹר וּמשֵׁל בְּרוּחוֹ מִלֹּכֵד עִיר. אֵיזֶהוּ עָשִׁיר, הַשָּׂמֵחַ בְּחֶלְקוֹ, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (תהלים קכח) יְגִיעַ כַּפֶּיךָ כִּי תֹאכֵל אַשְׁרֶיךָ וְטוֹב לָךְ. אַשְׁרֶיךָ, בָּעוֹלָם הַזֶּה. וְטוֹב לָךְ, לָעוֹלָם הַבָּא. אֵיזֶהוּ מְכֻבָּד, הַמְכַבֵּד אֶת הַבְּרִיּוֹת, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (שמואל א ב) כִּי מְכַבְּדַי אֲכַבֵּד וּבֹזַי יֵקָלּוּ:
(1) Ben Zoma said: Who is wise? He who learns from every man, as it is said: “From all who taught me have I gained understanding” (Psalms 119:99). Who is mighty? He who subdues his [evil] inclination, as it is said: “He that is slow to anger is better than the mighty; and he that rules his spirit than he that takes a city” (Proverbs 16:32). Who is rich? He who rejoices in his lot, as it is said: “You shall enjoy the fruit of your labors, you shall be happy and you shall prosper” (Psalms 128:2) “You shall be happy” in this world, “and you shall prosper” in the world to come. Who is he that is honored? He who honors his fellow human beings as it is said: “For I honor those that honor Me, but those who spurn Me shall be dishonored” (I Samuel 2:30).
A fitting beginning for a chapter, this mishnah brings Ben Zoma’s famous words, defining who is wise, heroic, rich and honored. This mishnah is interesting in that even though it is long, there is no discrepancies in the manuscripts. Shimon Ben Zoma was active in Rabbi Akiva’s circle, and died while young, before being ordained – some put his death at the Bar Kokhba revolt, 135 CE, but that is speculation. Together with Rabbi Akiva, Ben Azzai and Rabbi Elisha ben Abuyah (Acher) he explored the Higher Realms, and came back alive but mentally disrupted. His name appears in the Passover Haggadah, as he taught Eleazar ben Azariah the meaning of “all the days of your life”. He was an interpreter [darshan] of Text, and Mishnah Sotah 9:15 affirms that “with Ben Zoma the last of darshanim died”.
Ben Zoma lives up to the hype. By defining wise as someone “who learns from everyone”, he resets that wisdom is not a destination, but a journey that includes everyone you meet, and that the truly wise person is open and humble. Heroism is redefined as conquering one’s evil impulses, appetites and desires – and not a macho version of male dominance. In a master lesson, being rich is a matter of contentment, and we can definitely see this displayed in all sorts of magazines: wealth is really not a matter of bank account and glitz, it is an existential attitude. Rav Avi Novis-Deutsch points out that the sole purpose of marketing and advertising is to create a sensation of scarcity, a needy self-image, the perception of lack. Finally, honoring others is what makes one honored – and for those whose self-image is bound up with what others think of them, this is great advice.
(ב) בֶּן עַזַּאי אוֹמֵר, הֱוֵי רָץ לְמִצְוָה קַלָּה כְבַחֲמוּרָה, וּבוֹרֵחַ מִן הָעֲבֵרָה. שֶׁמִּצְוָה גּוֹרֶרֶת מִצְוָה, וַעֲבֵרָה גוֹרֶרֶת עֲבֵרָה. שֶׁשְּׂכַר מִצְוָה, מִצְוָה. וּשְׂכַר עֲבֵרָה, עֲבֵרָה:
(2) Ben Azzai said: Be quick in performing a minor commandment as in the case of a major one, and flee from transgression; For one commandment leads to another commandment, and transgression leads to another transgression; For the reward for performing a commandment is another commandment and the reward for committing a transgression is a transgression.
Our sage today is Ben Azzai, whose full name was Shimon ben Azzai. Just as Ben Zoma, he did not live long enough to receive the title rabbi, dying before his ordination. He was very devoted to study, to the point of not marrying, and faced the disdain of other rabbis (Yevamot 63b), even though apparently he was engaged to a daughter of Rabbi Akiva (Ketubot 63a). He was one of the four that entered the mysical Orchard (Pardes, see Chagigah 14b) and died as a result. His death is the symbol of the death of diligent students (Mishnah Sotah 9:15).
Ben Azza’is saying has two parts. The first one has to do with alacrity regarding doing simple or light mitzvot. What are minor mitzvot? That is a very good question. Yachin affirms this is dependent on the person, and that’s why Ben Azzai does not define it – whatever is easy for you to do. He continues talking about what constituted an easy mitzvah, and brings up four different types of “easiness” – the first one is that when a mitzvah is physically easy to do, let’s say, like putting on a talit. The second is when it is a difficult one, but because you are accostumed to do it, it becomes easy. I think putting on tefilin falls on that, as muscle memory aids a lot. He brings the example of look hard, such as praying on RH and YK, but since you pray every day those mitzvot become easier with time. The third, are mitzvot that you would do them anyway, such as honoring your parents, as your emotions help you do it. An the last one, he says, are mitzvot that bring happiness to the body, such as eating on Shabbat.
The second part of Ben Azzai’s saying got to be famous in a song, a link for which is in the comments. This is one of my favorite ideas about mitzvot: one should not worry so much about rewards, but know that there is a progressive transformation that we go through, internally, as we do mitzvot or transgress – we become more of what we do. So the reward is actually in becoming. The Vilna Gaon will affirm that there is a hidden reward for mitzvot, and it is hidden so that people will do mitzvot in faith, bringing the first chapter of Peah in the Talmud Yerushalmi as support. Avigdor Shinan brings the idea that the performance of any mitzvah, whether easy or difficult, brings in its wake the merit to do another one, basing himself on Tanhuma Buber Ki Tetze 1, which bases itself in the string of mitzvot found in Deuteronomy 22. Rav Avi Novis-Deutsch raises the possibility that Ben Azzai does not believe in external or next-world rewards for mitzvot.
(ג) הוּא הָיָה אוֹמֵר, אַל תְּהִי בָז לְכָל אָדָם, וְאַל תְּהִי מַפְלִיג לְכָל דָּבָר, שֶׁאֵין לְךָ אָדָם שֶׁאֵין לוֹ שָׁעָה וְאֵין לְךָ דָבָר שֶׁאֵין לוֹ מָקוֹם:
(3) He used to say: do not despise any man, and do not discriminate against anything, for there is no man that has not his hour, and there is no thing that has not its place.
We continue with the wisdom of Ben Azzai. This short mishnah is beautiful, in that it can be read in a couple of different ways. The general idea is that every person and every thing has its reason for being there, so one should disparage or discard nothing. Bartenura points out a negative way of reading: don’t say this person or this thing cannot harm you, because you don’t know, so don’t say that you will just keep away and nothing bad will happen. Others have a more positive way to read this – every person, no matter how wicked or unlearned or unintelligent is there because God has created them, and so they have a place in the world. Who are you to doubt God’s wisdom? Some good will come from them. The same thing happens to things, be they annoying or dangerous animals or stuff, as there is a use for everything, even those animals can be used for healing, as brought in Shabbat 77b (Yachin). Mishnat Eretz Israel will point out that despise can happen in two different ways: despise in the sense of not believing that each person has their function in your world, and also, giving them the basic honor that every person has. Derech Hayim, from the Maharal of Prague, sees this mishnah as a support and a consequence of the previous one, or – Ben Azzai is being consistent. Just as he saw mitzvot, he sees the rest of existence: just as you don’t know what the reward for mitzvot, you also don’t know the value of people and things. Just as commandments are interconnected, so too people and things. He brings Baba Batra 16a, in which the rabbis point out that every hair has its follicle, and Baba Kamma 2b, in which the rabbis affirm that a person has their particular constellation, ie, every person is born under their specific astrological arrangement, under their own “hour” – so they are special for the Holy One. There are those who do not like to read “hour” like that. The part about things has been read, more recently, as an environmental worry (Kulp): anything can be used for something else.
(ד) רַבִּי לְוִיטָס אִישׁ יַבְנֶה אוֹמֵר, מְאֹד מְאֹד הֱוֵי שְׁפַל רוּחַ, שֶׁתִּקְוַת אֱנוֹשׁ רִמָּה. רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן בֶּן בְּרוֹקָא אוֹמֵר, כָּל הַמְחַלֵּל שֵׁם שָׁמַיִם בַּסֵּתֶר, נִפְרָעִין מִמֶּנּוּ בְגָלוּי. אֶחָד שׁוֹגֵג וְאֶחָד מֵזִיד בְּחִלּוּל הַשֵּׁם:
(4) Rabbi Levitas a man of Yavneh said: be exceeding humble spirit, for the end of man is the worm.
Our mishnah will be split into two, as two different rabbis speak. Rabbi Levitas from Yavneh appears only here in all of Jewish literature. All it is known about him is that he was in the third generation of tana’im, that is, he was active between 80 and 110 CE. As such, it seems he lived his teaching: be very humble. Bartenura affirms that in every other trait one should try to find balance, the only exception is humility. Humility is highly valued byt the rabbis, and Megillah 31a affirms that whenever you find God’s greatness you also find God’s humility – the examples brought are basically God taking care of the widow, orphan and other people seen as in the margins of society. And pride is seen as one of the seven abominations for God (Prov. 16:5), as well as what makes people forget God’s presence (Deut. 8:14) – the Talmud in Sotah 5a brings several warnings against arrogance. Berachot 17a brings a series of prayers and actions of the rabbis, amny of which have humility at the center. Derech Chayim, consistent to his method, sees this mishnah as responding to the pior one, of Ben Azzai, with its warning of not disparaging anyone – yourself included, however, you should not be boastful or full of pride: this is the only way of not disparaging anyone. Rav Avi Novis Deutsch understands this mishnah’s message as if every person sees themselves as small as a worm then there is hope for humanity. Another understanding of what R. Levitas says is what we call “memento mori” – remember that you will die. Not as a dark or depressed attitude, but as a way of finding meaning in your life. If you recall, this was also a teaching from Akavyah ben Mehalelel, on Avot 3:1 – knowing that the body will eventually disintegrate through the work of worms should bring our pride down.
רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן בֶּן בְּרוֹקָא אוֹמֵר, כָּל הַמְחַלֵּל שֵׁם שָׁמַיִם בַּסֵּתֶר, נִפְרָעִין מִמֶּנּוּ בְגָלוּי. אֶחָד שׁוֹגֵג וְאֶחָד מֵזִיד בְּחִלּוּל הַשֵּׁם:
Rabbi Yohanan ben Berokah said: whoever profanes the name of heaven in secret, he shall be punished in the open. Unwittingly or wittingly, it is all one in profaning the name.
The second part of our mishnah bring the wisdom of R. Yochanan ben Baroka, active between c. 110 CE and c. 135 CE. His opinions in a few halachot, regarding marital and civil affairs, was adopted as law. One example of a position of his that was not adopted as law is that the mitzvah of being fruitful and multiply is both for women and men (M. Yevamot 6:6, Kiddushin 35a). He had a son, R. Ishmael ben R. Yochanan ben Baroka, from whom we will learn tomorrow.
R. Yochanan ben Baroka brings a concept that is fundamental in Judaism: the profanation of God’s name. This is the idea that a Jewish person is the representative of God’s presence, and so, when one acts immorally, they are desecrating God’s name. The opposite of chilul hashem is kiddush hashem, which is used not only for doing the right thing but also being killed because one is Jewish. We have too many examples in Jewish history for me to choose one to specify, and yet we all know of October 7th. The book of Leviticus/Vayikra is the origin of the term Hilul Hashem, as it is mentioned in Vayikra 18:21; 19:12; 22:2 and 22:32. The prophet Ezekiel also mentions this concept several times. R. Yochanan ben Baroka is bringing that concept together with another one, which is hypocrisy. That a person profaning God’s name in public would be punished is a given, but profaning God’s name in secret is what Yochanan ben Baroka is dealing with. In his opinion, the hypocritical person gets a punishment that begins with the exposition of their misdeed. The second part of his saying has raised eyebrows, particularly from Maimonides. There is an assumption that God is just, and so therefore that God would make a distinction between those who sin knowing what they are doing and those who don’t. So Maimonides interjects here and says that R. Yochanan ben Baroka is not saying that the punishment for both is the same, but that both cases will come to be publicly known. The idea, says Yachin, is that people who desecrate the Name hidden do not fear God – they fear the opinions of other people, and their judgment. In that they are similar to the pig, showing their split hooves to all, but internally being unkosher. So the punishment gets to be shame, as well. Avigdor Shinan points out that obviously for R. Yochanan ben Baroka the public desecration of God’s Name will be publicly punished, his admonition is for those who do it in secret. In Yoma 86a and following, we read a lot about scholars who commit Hilul Hashem, and how for a scholar the stakes are actually higher, since they not only are Jewish but are expected to be above reproach. Derech Chayim, consistently, will see this as an addition to what R. Levitas said in the previous mishnah: if you take seriously the honor of a human being, all the more so you should take seriously the honor of God and the Jewish people as a whole. Rav Avi Novis-Deutsch asks the question of how would anyone desecrate God’s name in secret, and answers that this can also be understood as an action of a person with themselves. I always assumed it had to do with malfeasance in conjunction with others who are also willing to do wrong, and yet use the sage as a front person to pretend that what they do is correct. The easiest example is financial corruption, but there are other things.
(ה) רַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל בְּנוֹ אוֹמֵר, הַלּוֹמֵד תּוֹרָה עַל מְנָת לְלַמֵּד, מַסְפִּיקִין בְּיָדוֹ לִלְמֹד וּלְלַמֵּד. וְהַלּוֹמֵד עַל מְנָת לַעֲשׂוֹת, מַסְפִּיקִין בְּיָדוֹ לִלְמֹד וּלְלַמֵּד לִשְׁמֹר וְלַעֲשׂוֹת.
(5) Rabbi Ishmael his son said: He who learns in order to teach, it is granted to him to study and to teach; But he who learns in order to practice, it is granted to him to learn and to teach and to practice.
We will study this mishnah today and on Sunday. It opens with “Rabbi Yishmael” and then, depending on the manuscript, this will be Rabbi Yishmael ben R. Yochanan ben Baroka or THE R. Yishmael, the contemporary to Rabbi Akiva, as the word בנו, his son, is missing from the Kaufmann manuscript, but is present both in the Munich manuscript and in the Parma manuscript, which you can access here: https://talmud.nli.org.il/892949.jpg. The Kaufmann manuscript has an extra word, אין, which was erased – and that word will make all the difference, as it makes for a text that criticizes harshly those who only learn in order to teach: “the one who learns in order to teach will not be able to study and teach”. The dropping of that word transforms the text into a softer version: “the one who learns in order to teach will be able to study and teach, the one who learns in order to do will be able to learn, teach, observe and do.” It does have an extra “to do”, but it is not vowelized – so as to show that the writer(s) of this manuscript had a question whether the word should be there at all. It is interesting that the translation found in Sefaria has skipped the word לִשְׁמֹר, to observe/guard/preserve. That word was missing in the Kaufman manuscript, and then it was added, as you can see on the side, but is present both in the Parma and Munich manuscripts. Bartenura is clear about the version he is reading, which is one without the word אין, and adds that the what is missing in the first case is lovingkindness, as a person who only studies in order to teach is really only interested in that, and not in acting towards others. The examples he brings are the sages Rabba and Abaye, whose stories regarding lovingkindness are brought in Rosh Hashanah 18a. Yachin compares people who only learn in order to teach to what is written in Yoma 72b: they have no courtyard but make a gate for their courtyard. Yachin continues and affirms that “guarding” can also be sticking in their memory, as actions tend to do, even if their intention is merely to do things, they will eventually teach others.
רַבִּי צָדוֹק אוֹמֵר, אַל תַּעֲשֵׂם עֲטָרָה לְהִתְגַּדֵּל בָּהֶם, וְלֹא קַרְדֹּם לַחְפֹּר בָּהֶם. וְכָךְ הָיָה הִלֵּל אוֹמֵר, וּדְאִשְׁתַּמֵּשׁ בְּתָגָא, חָלָף. הָא לָמַדְתָּ, כָּל הַנֶּהֱנֶה מִדִּבְרֵי תוֹרָה, נוֹטֵל חַיָּיו מִן הָעוֹלָם:
Rabbi Zadok said: do not make them a crown for self-exaltation, nor a spade with which to dig. So too Hillel used to say, “And he that puts the crown to his own use shall perish.” Thus you have learned, anyone who derives worldly benefit from the words of the Torah, removes his life from the world.
The second part of our mishnah brings the wisdom of Rabbi Tzadok. This name could refer to one of two sages, one more famous than the other. The first Rabbi Tzadok was active between 40 and 80 CE, the second was active between 135-170 CE. Rabbi Tzadok, the first, became famous due to the description of his fast for Jerusalem (Gittin 56a) and when R. Yochanan ben Zakkai was able to reach Vespasian, piercing the Roman siege, one of his three requests was medicine to heal R. Tzadok (Gittin 56b).
It is quite interesting that most manuscripts have a different version that the Vilna edition for this mishnah. Whereas we read קַרְדֹּם לַחְפֹּר “a spade to dig” most manuscripts, even Parma and Cambridge (see here: https://cudl.lib.cam.ac.uk/mirador/MS-ADD-00470-00001/0, the folio is 146v) have קורדום לאכל “a spade to eat”. Both the Kaufman and the Munich manuscripts then continue with האוכל הנאות, one who eats/consumes delightful things. The Cambridge skips the verb, and only has “delightful things”, the Parma manuscript uncharacteristically adds vowels to the word, making it “all who have delights”, but in the feminine form. The word “you have learned” לָמַדְתָּ, are missing from all of them, but the interjection הָא “behold” is present in all but the Kaufman manuscript.
The first warning of R. Tzadok is clear: one should not make Torah a reason for self-aggrandizement. That comes in the heels of the previous saying from R. Yishmael, which talked about the intentionality one should have when one studies. The second part, which brings Hillel’s words for support, is difficult to hear for professional rabbis, and probably is the reason why the Vilna has its variant – “eat” seems much more basic than “dig”, and so digging might be seen as a less common action. The same discomfort is in “delights” – maybe “basic things” are permitted. The words of Hillel are taken from Avot 1:14, at the very end of the Sefaria version of that mishnah. It is important to notice that Hilel’s words are being used as if they were Text, which is the first time that the Mishnah quotes a rabbi as prooftext. According to R. Tzadok, using Torah to make a living is forbidden. Maimonides certainly believes that, and several rabbis thorughout history have preferred a life of poverty, or had Torah and a job, take Rashi, for instance, who was a vintner. There are those who read this as “bad use”, as in, using words of Torah for evil. That is the position of R. Avi Novis-Deutsch. I particularly can think of rabbis who end up doing terrible things to Torah, Judaism and the rabbinate as a whole due to internalizing these ideas. R. Dr. Joshua Kulp believes that the complete exclusion of financial gain is impractical and in the long run diminishes the possibility of great Torah in the world, he understands that the main goal of a rabbi cannot be making a buck, but do it for the greatness of Heaven. Other opinions, such as Bartenura, affirm that teachers of children, for instance, are being paid because they keep the kids out of trouble; judges are paid for the time that they are giving up of working in something else; that Torah scholars have other financial benefits – and that the early sages were much more pious, but this is not quite sustainable in Bartenura’s time (1445-1515). Yachin points out that one should begin studying Torah out of love – and then honor will come, which is in a beautiful sugya in Nedarim 62a, that begins with the admonishment that one should not begin studying because they want the title rabbi. The question of exactly is a קרדום is quite interesting in that imparts a different flavor to the admonition. Our translation is “spade”, Yachin affirms it is something used to cut trees – an axe, and that is how he reads the word “to eat”. He brings Derech Eretz Zuta 2:4 as proof of this usage – which mirrors our mishnah, even though there it does not explicit what kind of eating the text is talking about.
(ו) רַבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹמֵר, כָּל הַמְכַבֵּד אֶת הַתּוֹרָה, גּוּפוֹ מְכֻבָּד עַל הַבְּרִיּוֹת. וְכָל הַמְחַלֵּל אֶת הַתּוֹרָה, גּוּפוֹ מְחֻלָּל עַל הַבְּרִיּוֹת:
(6) Rabbi Yose said: whoever honors the Torah is himself honored by others, and whoever dishonors the Torah is himself dishonored by others.
Rabbi Yosi ben Chalafta (in the Kaufman manuscript Yoseh) was a student of Rabbi Akiva, and active between 135-170 CE. He was a teacher of Rabbi Yehudah HaNasi, the sage responsible for the compilation of the Mishnah.
There are many ways of honoring Torah. Bartenura will say that the greatest of those is to expound on the missing and on the extra letters in the scroll. For Maimonides it includes supporting and honoring those who write books about Torah. Honoring is not just a question of words, but also of actions: one of the ways that Kulp points out of honoring Torah is not to place a Torah scroll on a bed or a bench, or a printed chumash on top of it, or a printed book of the prophets or a siddur on top of a chumash, or leaving such a book open and unread or unused, or leaving it upside down on a shelf. Avigdor Shinan explains that this is a continuation of the conversation of previous mishnah, since honoring is the opposite of using it as a spade, and Yachin also points out that even if one has an occupation that is a source of humiliation, since you are not using the Torah as a spade, you shouldn’t see yourself as humiliated by it – after all, you are honoring Torah by not using it as a spade. Yachin says that this will apply even to those who are superficial and cannot see that you are filled with Torah, and only pay attention to your body that is dirty from your occupation, that God will send those people a flow of kindness when dealing with you. Those who debase Torah will also be debased in the eyes of all. Derech Chayim will point out that Proverbs 3:16 anf Proverbs 3:35 will indicate the same, as also midrashim such as Yalkut Shimeoni on Nach 935:15. Spiritually speaking he will explain that whenever we connect with something, a little of that comes to our insides – and this creates a mirroring effect with the world outside of us.
(ז) רַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל בְּנוֹ אוֹמֵר, הַחוֹשֵׂךְ עַצְמוֹ מִן הַדִּין, פּוֹרֵק מִמֶּנּוּ אֵיבָה וְגָזֵל וּשְׁבוּעַת שָׁוְא. וְהַגַּס לִבּוֹ בַהוֹרָאָה, שׁוֹטֶה רָשָׁע וְגַס רוּחַ:
(7) Rabbi Ishmael his son said: he who refrains himself from judgment, rids himself of enmity, robbery and false swearing; But he whose heart is presumptuous in giving a judicial decision, is foolish, wicked and arrogant.
Rabbi Ishmael ben Rabbi Yosei was the oldest of Rabbi Yosei’s five sons, being active between 170 and 200 CE. He is known for having transmitted to R. Yehudah HaNasi the teachings of Rabbi Yosei. In the Yerushalmi, Megillah 74d or 4:1, is it said that he could write the entire Torah by heart. He controversially worked for the Romans, catching Jewish thieves and handing them to their authority (Baba Metzia 84a). In Genesis Rabbah 81 he gets into an argument with the Samaritans, and in Sanhedrin 38b with a heretic, probably an early Christian.
In this mishnah and the next he will discuss judgment. It is important to take a step back and understand that in the Mishnaic period there was no such an occupation among the Jews. You did not get paid to be a judge. Rather, men would sit in ad hoc groups of three and render judgments, they might be rabbis, they might not; they might be experts, they might not. In the Bavli, Sanhedrin 23a and the rest of that chapter, you can read how this worked, as it discusses how judges and witnesses could be disqualified, giving a window into this loosely connected system of ad hoc courts. It is with this background that we see what Rabbi Yishmael is trying to say: don’t jump into the possibility of being a judge, as there are many pitfalls: you might find yourself with an enemy after rendering a decision, you escape misjudging and getting yourself seen as a robber, and you don’t make people swear wrongly. But this only applies, of course, to judges that are presumptuous or non-chalant – meaning, they are either eager to judge or judge quickly, without knowing the facts and weighing their decision. Those people are described as foolish, thinking they know what judging involves; wicked, rendering bad decisions; and arrogant, as they think that they are smarter than they actually are. Bartenura will say this only applies when there are people that can do a better job than you can – otherwise, it is better to have courts than to have no recourse. And he brings an important voice in the Jewish tradition: before trying to litigate things with a court, it is better to get to פשרה compromise or arbitration, as Sanhedrin 7a explains, and Maimonides (Mishneh Torah, the Laws of the Sanhedrin 22:4) holds. Yachin affirms that the enmity described here is the feelings between the litigants, and that there is no fear of a false swearing, as when people swear on a lie it is known that they shouldn’t and the burden in on them. But under certain circumstances, a person may swear without knowing all of it, and so this is an empty oath. With all these pitfalls, if you self-congratulate because people ask you to be a judge, you are a fool at best, and wicked and arrogant at worst.
(ח) הוּא הָיָה אוֹמֵר, אַל תְּהִי דָן יְחִידִי, שֶׁאֵין דָּן יְחִידִי אֶלָּא אֶחָד. וְאַל תֹּאמַר קַבְּלוּ דַעְתִּי, שֶׁהֵן רַשָּׁאִין וְלֹא אָתָּה:
(8) He used to say: judge not alone, for none may judge alone save one. And say not “accept my view”, for they are free but not you.
Continuing the discussion of yesterday, R. Yishmael the son of Rabbi Yosi expounds now about the ability of an expert to judge alone, according to Bartenura and Yachin. This is permitted, and Yerushalmi Sanhedrin 1:1 or 18a (Venice ed) or 1b (Vilna) brings not only that discussion but examples. Sanhedrin 3a explains that by Torah law it is permitted to do so in cases of loans and admissions, but rabbinic law expects a beit din of three. R. Yishmael is saying that from the side of humility, one shouldn’t accept to be a sole judge in any instance – after all, only God is the True Judge. The part of “accept my opinion” is directed to the other rabbis in the beit din, and not to the litigants, according to Bartenura, and the last part “they are free/permitted” means that you joined them, and so the ruling should be by majority – “after the majority one should incline” (Baba Metzia 59b). Derech Chayim brings the point that the name E-lohim, which with small letters is also applied to judges, has to do with separation, and that is why judges need to be separated from those whom they judge – and from this we derive the idea of disqualification of judges based on familial ties or any other ties. And this is why, he says, the story of creation begins with that name, as separation is necessary.
(ט) רַבִּי יוֹנָתָן אוֹמֵר, כָּל הַמְקַיֵּם אֶת הַתּוֹרָה מֵעֹנִי, סוֹפוֹ לְקַיְּמָהּ מֵעשֶׁר. וְכָל הַמְבַטֵּל אֶת הַתּוֹרָה מֵעשֶׁר, סוֹפוֹ לְבַטְּלָהּ מֵעֹנִי:
(9) Rabbi Jonathan said: whoever fulfills the Torah out of a state of poverty, his end will be to fulfill it out of a state of wealth; And whoever discards the Torah out of a state of wealth, his end will be to discard it out of a state of poverty.
The sage of today is R. Yonatan, according to the Kaufman and the Parma manuscripts, or r. Yochanan, according to the Munich and Cambridge manuscripts. The Vilna edition has Yonatan, and this is R. Yonatan ben Yosef, who was a devoted student of R. Yishmael. This is his only saying in the mishnah, and given that the mishnah we have today is a product of the school of R. Akiva, this is hardly surprising. Mishnat Eretz Israel (Samuel, Chana and Zeev Safrai, 21st c) tells us that the two schools were located in two different cities, R. Akiva’s was in Usha (now a national park in Israel) and R. Yishmael’s in Mechoz Yehudah, which is in the West Bank, and was decimated after the Bar Kochva revolt. This also contributed for fewer surviving students. R. Yonatan appears a few more time in the Tosefta. R. Yochanan was an amora, so that name is probably a mistake from the scribes.
As we explained in a previous mishnah, in Tannaitic times there was no such a thing as a paid rabbinic group, and so some sages had money from their families and others didn’t, having to work to make a living – and in some cases so quite making it. R. Yonatan seems to be saying that despite poverty, if one keeps Torah, one will eventually become rich, or at least financially comfortable. And that the converse is true. This is a difficult mishnah to be taken face value, as empirically we know this is not true, and the Talmud has many examples of people who were incredibly poor and continued to be poor even though tey were great sages. Most commentators understand that if one studies Torah when they are poor, if they become rich they will keep it; the converse is that, if one does not keep Torah when they are rich, when they become poor all the more so they won’t keep Torah. That sounds a bit more true. Another way to understand this mishnah is to read wealth in a metaphoric way, that is, not wealth as money but as being satisfied with your life. Rambam seems to be saying that if you study Torah even though there are distractions (poverty) eventually you will have no distractions (wealth). Derech Chayim brings a sugya in Yoma 35b, which has the three things a person will be asked as they enter in the world to come, and Torah study is one of them. The sugya imagines both a poor and a rich person, each giving their poverty and wealth as excuses for not studying Torah, and each being given the example of Hillel, who was very poor, and R. Eleazar ben Charsum, who was incredibly rich. So Torah is something above nature, says the Maharal, and studying it and loving it are actions that are above a simple understanding of life, and we know that “life span, children and sustenance are not dependent on merit” as Moed Katan 28b brings.
(י) רַבִּי מֵאִיר אוֹמֵר, הֱוֵי מְמַעֵט בְּעֵסֶק, וַעֲסֹק בַּתּוֹרָה. וֶהֱוֵי שְׁפַל רוּחַ בִּפְנֵי כָל אָדָם. וְאִם בָּטַלְתָּ מִן הַתּוֹרָה, יֶשׁ לְךָ בְטֵלִים הַרְבֵּה כְנֶגְדָּךְ. וְאִם עָמַלְתָּ בַתּוֹרָה, יֶשׁ לוֹ שָׂכָר הַרְבֵּה לִתֶּן לָךְ:
(10) Rabbi Meir said: Engage but little in business, and busy yourself with the Torah. Be of humble spirit before all men. If you have neglected the Torah, you shall have many who bring you to neglect it, but if you have labored at the study of Torah, there is much reward to give unto you
Our mishnah today is in the name of Rabbi Me’ir. Rabbi Me’ir was an outstanding and interesting scholar, active between 135 and 170 CE. He was a scribe, besides being a rabbi. He’s described as having studied with Rabbi Akiva, R. Ishmael and is a proeminent figure in the saga of Elisha ben Abuyah (Chagigah 14b-15b). He became one of the leaders of the Sanhedrin in Usha, until he quarreled with R. Shimon ben Gamliel II. His wife Beruriah, a scholar in her own right, is one of the few women named in the Talmud – her father, Hananiah ben Teradion, was one of the ten martyrs of the Yom Kippur Eleh Ezkereh. According to the Babylonian Talmud, all mishnayot that state laws without a name are attributed to Me’ir, that is, when Rabbi Yehudah Hanasi compiled the mishnah, he used Rabbi Meir’s mishnayot as the base.
Rabbi Me’ir’s saying has three parts: the first one encourages people to engage in a little business and in much Torah. Kohelet Rabbah 2:17 tells the story that Rabbi Meir earned three coins a week as a scribe. One he would spend on food, one on clothing and one he would give to support other scholars. When asked why he was not leaving an inheritance for his children he replied that if they became righteous, they would merit to earn their own living; and if they became wicked, he would be giving and inheritance to God’s enemies. It sounds harsh, but this illustrates his faith that God helps to provide for those who learn Torah – as long as they had an occupation. It is important to notice that nowhere here R. Me’ir is expecting his children or himself to need tzedakah, even though he himself is giving a third of what he makes to tzedakah. The second part of his saying has to do with humility: a very common idea is that the better scholar you are, the more humble you should be. We encountered that idea before, particularly in Avot 4:1 and 4:4. The same idea is brought in the Talmud, see Ta’anit 7a and . The third part of his saying, regarding the study of Torah, brings an interesting issue: distractions. Nowadays, when everything conspires to distract us, this is easily understood: there are many things that can distract us from living a meaningful life. Studying Torah, as is brings values and actions to the forefront of our awareness, is particularly important. The more distractions we pay attention to, the more will spring up. Social media is one example of that, as all sites are conceived to keep one hooked on as long as possible, but other places come to mind, such as casinos and streaming services. There are commentators that understand the word בְטֵלִים as people who would “just hang out: and make you lose time (Bartenura). Yachin believes this is midah kneged midah, or tit-for-tat from heaven: you began neglecting Torah, you will get more impediments to go back to your study. The Maharal of Prague in Derech Chayim brings Brachot 5a to illustrate this. However, says R. Me’ir, once you get going with the study of Torah, you will get a lot of reward. Bartenura believes that this is from God, Yachin that your needs will be done by others (he quotes Brachot 35b).
(יא) רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר בֶּן יַעֲקֹב אוֹמֵר, הָעוֹשֶׂה מִצְוָה אַחַת, קוֹנֶה לוֹ פְרַקְלִיט אֶחָד. וְהָעוֹבֵר עֲבֵרָה אַחַת, קוֹנֶה לוֹ קַטֵּגוֹר אֶחָד. תְּשׁוּבָה וּמַעֲשִׂים טוֹבִים, כִּתְרִיס בִּפְנֵי הַפֻּרְעָנוּת.
(11) Rabbi Eliezer ben Jacob said: he who performs one commandment acquires for himself one advocate, and he who commits one transgression acquires for himself one accuser. Repentance and good deeds are a shield against punishment.
Who is R. Eliezer ben Yaakov? That is our first question, since there are two rabbis with that name. The first one was active between 80 and 110 CE, he was highly regarded for his knowledge of the Temple. This one is cited in Yoma 16b due to a discussion regarding the rooms or apartments in the Temple and mentioned in Avot de Rabi Natan 18:4 as קב ונקי, small but clean [of mistakes] or airtight. Several of his mishnayot have to do with agriculture, particularly bikurim (first fruits) and kilayim (mixtures of seeds). The second one was active between 135 and 170 CE, was a student of rabbi Akiva and one of Rabbi Me’ir’s teachers, and given that Rabbi Me’ir was just quoted, many think this is the rabbi we are studying with in this mishnah. He survived the fall of Betar and became a participant in the Sanhedrin in Usha. His kindness is illustrated in a story which tells that once, when a blind man came to his town, Eliezer gave him a seat of honor above his own. When the people saw this, they maintained the blind man in honor. The latter, on learning the reason for his good fortune, offered a prayer on Eliezer's behalf saying: "You have dealt kindly with one who is seen but sees not. May the One who sees but is unseen accept your prayers and deal graciously with you" (Yerushalmi Pe'ah 8:8 / Venice 21b / Vilna 37b).
This mishnah affirms that as we act in the world we acquire a defender or a prosecutor, depending on our actions. The word for defender, סַנֵּגוֹר sanegor is explained by Bartenura as “שׂוֹנֵא תִּגָּר”, that is, one who hates complaints, whereas the word for accuser קַטֵּגוֹר, kategor, comes from “קוֹרֵא תִּגָּר”, one who calls out complaints. This is neat, even though the text of the mishnah does nto set those two figures, but uses the word פְּרַקְלִיט to indicate a sanegor. That word comes, apparently, from the Greek parakletos, advocate. Bartenura explains that those are angels. Yachin will explain that, as we are made in the image of God, we too create angels through our actions. He invites us to reread the story of Yaakov and the ladder (Gen. 28) as the soul and the angels created by Yaakov’s actions, which can benefit (go up) the world - or not; with God on top checking Yaakov’s deeds in the house of Lavan. The mishnah continues with the exhortation for teshuvah and good deeds, meaning, even if one has done several transgressions, there is always the door of teshuvah, as the process of return was created before the world was created (Midrash Tehilim 90:7 and many other places). Derech Chayim, and we will forgive him for his views on women, explains this mishnah as he usually does, responding to the previous one. Torah study is a great mitzvah, and “תַלְמוּד תּוֹרָה כְּנֶגֶד כּוּלָּם” (Shabbat 127a), by which he means its reward is comprehensive, a receipt for the totality of it, and not, as with other mitzvot, a receipt for each and every one action – so in the case of Torah study, we would make one angel, and strengthen that angel as we continue to study every day, which does not happen, say, for tzedakah – it is a single angel for every tzedakah we give. But other deeds and teshuvah act as a shield, according to the tanna, and so tehre is always more to do, and to become a better person is a life long series of actions.
רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן הַסַּנְדְּלָר אוֹמֵר, כָּל כְּנֵסִיָּה שֶׁהִיא לְשֵׁם שָׁמַיִם, סוֹפָהּ לְהִתְקַיֵּם. וְשֶׁאֵינָהּ לְשֵׁם שָׁמַיִם, אֵין סוֹפָהּ לְהִתְקַיֵּם:
(Rabbi Yochanan Hasandlar said: every assembly which is for the sake of heaven, will in the end endure; and every assembly which is not for the sake of heaven, will not endure in the end.
We continue with the same mishnah, this time with the next sage, Rabbi Yochanan HaSandlar. His name is interesting in that it can mean two things: either he made sandals, and that is how he made a living, or it is an epithet from his origins, Alexandria. He was born in Alexandria, Egypt (Yerushalmi Chagiga 3:1), and HaSandlar may be a corruption of the word HaAlexandri, meaning the one from Alexandria. Once he moved to Israel, he became the suporter and student of Rabbi Akiva (Brachot 22a). When R. Akiva was arrested by the Romans, R. Yochanan found a way to reach him to the prison and ask for his opinion on various halakhic issues (Yerushalmi Yevamot 12:5). Due to the political and economic situation that prevailed in the country after the Bar Kochba uprising, R. Yochanan, together with other sages, asked to descend to Babylon, but standing on the border of the Land of Israel he regretted and remained in the land (Yerushalmi Yevamot 4:11). Only a few of his teachings are quoted in the Sages, and in the entire Mishnah he is mentioned only three more times. According to medieval tradition, his grave is located in Meron, near the tomb of Rabbi Shimon Bar Yochai.
The idea that something that is for the sake of heaven to endure is fundamental in our tradition. Before we had that laboring with the community should be for the sake of heaven (2:2) and that our actions should likewise be for the sake of heaven (2:12). A gathering, and Yachin insists that we are talking even a regular gathering, not necessarily a synagogue or a prayer circle, that is for the sake of heaven endures. Later (5:17) we will have the idea of disputes for the sake of heaven, and also the idea that love that is dependent on something eventually disappears (5:16).
The Parma manuscript has its own understanding, or maybe a different version had been seen by the sofer: on top of the word , heaven, it has the word mitzvah.
(יב) רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בֶּן שַׁמּוּעַ אוֹמֵר, יְהִי כְבוֹד תַּלְמִידְךָ חָבִיב עָלֶיךָ כְּשֶׁלְּךָ, וּכְבוֹד חֲבֵרְךָ כְּמוֹרָא רַבְּךָ, וּמוֹרָא רַבְּךָ כְּמוֹרָא שָׁמָיִם:
(12) Rabbi Elazar ben Shammua said: let the honor of your student be as dear to you as your own, and the honor of your colleague as the reverence for your teacher, and the reverence for your teacher as the reverence of heaven.
The sage today is Eleazar ben Shamu’a. The Kaufmann manuscript omits his father’s name, but this is quite common with this sage according to Shechter and Mendelsohn in the Enciclopaedia Judaica. The Parma manuscript (https://talmud.nli.org.il/892949.jpg) has the shortened form Lazer. He was a student of Rabbi Akiva, who could not ordain him due to the Hadrianic persecutions. His ordination in a place exactly between Usha and Shefaram, by R. Yehuda ben Baba, is famous as it figures in the liturgy for Musaf of Yom Kippur – being described twice in the Talmud, in Avodah Zarah 8b and Sanhedrin 13b. He eventually had a large number of students and was praised because of his heart (many understand his wisdom) by R. Yochanan (Eruvin 53a).
Our mishnah has two versions, and “the honor of your student as your own” is the version chosen by the Vilna edition, present in the Munich manuscript. The Kaufman, Cambridge and Parma manuscripts have “the honor of your student as the honor of your colleague”, showing a more clear chain structure. The warning of Eleazar ben Shamu’a is about the question of honoring people. Clearly, he understands that honoring heaven comes more easily than teacher, colleague and student, in that order. His warning is regarding those who are smaller than you, according to Yachin, since one tends to see themselves as greater than the student, and yet, pearls can come from students’ mouths, as he says. Regarding the honor of your colleague, Yachin reminds us that one should dispute a position with a colleague only when one has a good reason to do so, as sometimes the emotions and desires of being recognized take over one’s words and actions. Finally, disputing with one’s teacher has been seen as problematic at best. Traditionally, “stating the law in front of one’s teacher” is so unwarranted that students would deserve death because of that (see Brachot 31b, Eruvin 63a, Yerushalmi Gitin 1:2 / 43c / 5b).
Link for the Cambridge manuscript, folio is 146v:
https://cudl.lib.cam.ac.uk/mirador/MS-ADD-00470-00001/0
Link for the Parma manuscript:
(יג) רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, הֱוֵי זָהִיר בַּתַּלְמוּד, שֶׁשִּׁגְגַת תַּלְמוּד עוֹלָה זָדוֹן. רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר, שְׁלשָׁה כְתָרִים הֵם, כֶּתֶר תּוֹרָה וְכֶתֶר כְּהֻנָּה וְכֶתֶר מַלְכוּת, וְכֶתֶר שֵׁם טוֹב עוֹלֶה עַל גַּבֵּיהֶן:
(13) Rabbi Judah said: be careful in study, for an error in study counts as deliberate sin. Rabbi Shimon said: There are three crowns: the crown of Torah, the crown of priesthood, and the crown of royalty, but the crown of a good name supersedes them all.
Rabbi Yehuda bar Yilai had many teachers, and his specific teacher was Rabbi Tarfon. Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai was a student of Rabbi Akiva. Their story is intertwined with Lag BaOmer and caves, as you can read in Shabbat 33b. Rabbi Yehuda Bar Yilai, many times just called R. Yehuda, is cited more than 3,000 times in Tannaitic literature alone. When he disputes with Rabbi Meir or Rabbi Shimon (two sages with whom he often disputes) the halakhah is always according to his view. R. Shimon bar Yochai, to whom the Zohar is attributed and whose yahrtzeit is Lag BaOmer, is also called Rashbi or Rishbi. Traditionally, his burial place is a cave in Meron, which nowadays is visited on Lag BaOmer by multitudes. A miracle maker, his life is surrounded with amazing stories, present in the Talmud and in the Zohar. Both rabbis were active between 135 and 170 CE and both were ordained by Rabbi Yehuda ben Baba in a place between Usha and Shefaram to avoid bringing Roman destruction to either city (Sanhedrin 14a). That story is part of the Yom Kippur Musaf service.
Our mishnah begins with R. Yehuda’s words, in which he warns sages to study hard, as mistakes can lead to sins. Note that the word used is תַּלְמוּד talmud, and not Torah. Derech Chayim points out that the text does not have mishnah either, as Torah and Mishnah do not bring reasons for the law, but the Talmud does. According to Rabbi Dr. Joshua Kulp, this is comparing different traditions and strives to learn the matter deeply, its reasons and its details, and it is easy to make mistakes in this kind of learning. Carelessness is considered to be as sinful as intentionally making a mistake. Derech Chayim brings an interesting parable, of a person walking in the dark and bumping into things versus a person walkign with a bright lamp and bumping into things. In the first case, it is not carelessness, but inability to see. In the second case it is carelessness. A more detailed teaching by the same rabbi on the same topic is found in Baba Metzia 33b. Yachin sees these words as responding to the previous mishnah, that talked about being careful with the honor of a teacher and with disagreeing with a teacher over matters of Jewish law. The warning here, he says, is towards the rabbi, who needs to be careful regarding what he teaches, so that his own understanding be passed to his students clearly. Equally, the student must be careful with how they learn. The Parma manuscript has a footnote, adding that there are those who read this as "talmid", not study, but student, since the inadvertent mistakes of a talmid chacham are counted as if made on purpose. Enormous pressure on teachers.
Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai brings a famous teaching, that of the three crowns. Derech Chayim points out that actually he’s talking about four crowns, and not three. The explanation is that in the Temple, three vessels had rims that reminded people of crowns: the ark, which carried the Aseret HaDibrot, that corresponds to the crown of Torah; the altar, and that corresponds to the crown of the priesthood; and the table of the bread of faces, that corresponds to the crown of the king. That can be found in Yoma 72b, in the name of R. Yochanan. However, points Derech Chayim, the crown of the good name is above them all – and so it is symbolized by the menorah, as we know the verse “For the commandment is a lamp, and the Torah is a light” from Proverbs 6:23, as the menorah was higher than all the other crowns. The crown of the good name, he says, is the one crown that extends forever, just as the light extends forever. And in Kohelet Rabbah 7:1 Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai also says “A good name is more beloved than the ark of the covenant”. Yachin points out that the crown of the good name is basic for the other crowns to be valued, as at the end it is your good deeds that make the other crowns (two which could be considered accidents of birth) valuable. Arrogance, he will point out, makes all those crowns “a golden ring in the snout of a pig” (Prov. 11:22).
(יד) רַבִּי נְהוֹרַאי אוֹמֵר, הֱוֵי גוֹלֶה לִמְקוֹם תּוֹרָה, וְאַל תֹּאמַר שֶׁהִיא תָבֹא אַחֲרֶיךָ, שֶׁחֲבֵרֶיךָ יְקַיְּמוּהָ בְיָדֶךָ. וְאֶל בִּינָתְךָ אַל תִּשָּׁעֵן (משלי ג):
(14) Rabbi Nehorai said: go as a [voluntary] exile to a place of Torah and say not that it will come after you, for [it is] your fellow [student]s who will make it permanent in your hand and “and lean not upon your own understanding” (Proverbs 3:5).
Rabbi Nehorai. What a name! It means “full of light”. Some understand this to be a nickname to other tannaim, such as Rabbi Meir, Rabbi Nehemiah or Rabbi Elazar ben Arach (see Eruvin 13b. This same mishnah is brought in Shabbat 147b, where the same question regarding the name is raised). There are others who believe we are talking about a specific tanna, who would have studied with Rabbi Yehoshua and Rabbi Tarfon. An interesting detail is that many times when R. Nehorai is mentioned, he is in conversaton to none other than Elyiahu HaNavi, the prophet Elijah.
Rabbi Nehorai’s mishnah is talking to one who is beginning serious study of Torah, according to Yachin. The idea of exile is not necessarily negative, but the effort that a person makes when going out of what is known and comfortable, so that they can “go after” Torah. The idea, really, is that one cannot take for granted that Torah will come to them, as Torah is not one of the things dependent upon mazal, or birth constellation (see Moed Kattan 28a). Bartenura will interject and say that Torah really only become yours if you have a give and take with your peers, meaning, your colleagues do not give it to you – it is only internalized by your own struggling with it. The Vilna Gaon points out that this idea is also in Ta’anit 7a, as it explains the verse in Prov. 27:17. “iron sharpens iron”. And this, he says, is why the mishnah ends with “do not rely in your own understanding”. More than any other religion, Judaism asks of us to question – and to question our absolute certainties as well, being open to consider other people’s ideas.
(טו) רַבִּי יַנַּאי אוֹמֵר, אֵין בְּיָדֵינוּ לֹא מִשַּׁלְוַת הָרְשָׁעִים וְאַף לֹא מִיִּסּוּרֵי הַצַּדִּיקִים. רַבִּי מַתְיָא בֶן חָרָשׁ אוֹמֵר, הֱוֵי מַקְדִּים בִּשְׁלוֹם כָּל אָדָם. וֶהֱוֵי זָנָב לָאֲרָיוֹת, וְאַל תְּהִי רֹאשׁ לַשּׁוּעָלִים:
(15) Rabbi Yannai said: it is not in our hands [to explain the reason] either of the security of the wicked, or even of the afflictions of the righteous. Rabbi Mathia ben Harash said: Upon meeting people, be the first to extend greetings; And be a tail unto lions, and not a head unto foxes.
Our mishnah brings two sages, Rabbi Yannai and Rabbi Matiah ben Harash. The Kaufman manuscript had Yannai in the previous mishnah, and I had not paid attention to that. Rabbi Yannai is probably the father of Rabbi Dostai who was mentioned above in mishnah 3:8. This is his only statement in the mishnah. Rabbi Yannai says an important thing: there is no way to explain how bad things happen to good people and good things happen to evil people. The rabbinic standard answer is that the evil people receive whatever reward for the eventual good deeds they had in this world, so after death they will receive their punishment, the opposite is true of the righteous: they receive their punishments in this world for all eventual evil deeds they did, and all the reward for their good deeds in the next. Rabbi Yannai finds this answer not good enough. As a friend of mine would put it “pie in the sky when you die”. Rabbi Yannai simply says: we have no idea. That’s the end of that. Embrace the not-knowing, the fact that all is a Big Mystery. The same idea is brought in Brachot 5a, where Moshe wants three things, one of which is to know exactly the answer to this question, and “Rabbi Meir said … [this] one was not granted to him. As it is stated (Exodus 33:19), 'and I will be gracious to whom I will be gracious,' even though he is not worthy; 'and I will have mercy upon whom I will have mercy,' even though he is not worthy." But note that the translation and this explanation reflects one way of understanding this mishnah, which is Yachin’s. The words “to explain the reason” are not in the mishnah, which reads really “it is not in our hands either the success of the wicked or the suffering of the righteous”. Bartenura brings a second explanation: because we are in a state of exile, there is no one who is fully evil, nor totally righteous. So things aren’t as cler as they should be, or would be, if we were in a state of redemption. I find it fascinating that in this explanation the idea of redemption does not exclude the presence of evil.
The second sage of today is Matiah ben Harash. He was active between 135 and 170 CE, having fled the land of Israel during Hadrianic persecutions and the Bar Kochba revolt. Interestingly, he flees to Rome, where he establishes a yeshiva. R. Matiah ben Harash says something that reminds us of Shammai the elder (Avot 1:15): be the first one to say ‘hi’ to the other person. Yachin: even if that person is not Jewish and even if they are in a lower social rung that you, since being beloved by all those around you is the greatest achievement in this world. R. Matiah continues with the exhortation to have valor: foxes are not a symbol of valor and truth. Yachin understands that this means that one should associate with those who have more honor, and not less. Derech Chayim understands that this has to do with the trait of humility.
(טז) רַבִּי יַעֲקֹב אוֹמֵר, הָעוֹלָם הַזֶּה דּוֹמֶה לִפְרוֹזְדוֹר בִּפְנֵי הָעוֹלָם הַבָּא. הַתְקֵן עַצְמְךָ בַפְּרוֹזְדוֹר, כְּדֵי שֶׁתִּכָּנֵס לַטְּרַקְלִין:
(16) Rabbi Jacob said: this world is like a vestibule before the world to come; prepare yourself in the vestibule, so that you may enter the banqueting-hall.
The Kaufmann manuscript brings the two mishnayot combined, and under the name of Rabbi Akiva. That is the only manuscript that does that – all others (Munich, Parma, Cambridge) bring these sayings under R. Yaakov. It is interesting to note that Akiva is the name Yaakov in Aramaic. If this was said by R. Yaakov, without any patronimic, then we are talking about R. Yaakov ben Korshai, a tanna active between 135 and 170 CE, who taught both Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel II and his son, R. Yehuda HaNasi (see Yerushalmi, Shab. 10:5 / 12c / 63a; Pes. 10:1 / 37b / 68b). In the Tosefta, a tannaitic collection external to the Mishnah, we hear R. Yaakov saying that there is no reward or punishment in this world for any mitzvah or transgression, that all is in the world to come (Tosefta Hullin 10:3). This is also brought in the Bavli, Hullin 142a, in which Rabbi Yaakov is identified as the grandson of Elisha ben Abuya, the famous Acher.
The preoccupation with the world to come and its relationship to this world is at the center of this mishnah. Here, this world is called a prozdor, a vestibule, an entry hall, a waiting room to the great banquet in the world to come, compared to a banqueting hall or chamber by some (Maimonides) and to a palace by others (Yachin, Bartenura). One has to prepare oneself here in order to be able to be admitted in the world to come. Derech Chayim will point out that the idea of a world to come is found in every people and culture, and so there is no reason to doubt it. Similarly, nowadays, when researchers talk about the phenomenom of NDEs, they stress that the elements are similar in all cultures. Derech Chayim piints out that when the Talmud says that there are those who lost the right to be in the world to come it lists in frst place those who do not believe in it, and that is an example of middah kneged middah, as one does so it is done to them. I don’t really believe in that – I think God can deal with our own mistaken certainties.
The next saying, comparing the existence in this world and the next, has been a matter of a lot of discussion. In the world to come, say the commentators, there is no such a thing as teshuvah and good deeds, so there is no possibility of change. Here, in this broken and sometimes maddening world, we have the chance to become better. However, the tranquility in the world to come is absolute. The corollary of this sentence is that one should use wisely every hour they have in this world. Judaism, says R. Dr. Kulp, is a religion that concentrates in this world, even though there is the world to come. We do not want to speed up getting there – life here, precisely because it leads to growth and change, is precious.
(יח) רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן אֶלְעָזָר אוֹמֵר, אַל תְּרַצֶּה אֶת חֲבֵרְךָ בִשְׁעַת כַּעֲסוֹ, וְאַל תְּנַחֲמֶנּוּ בְּשָׁעָה שֶׁמֵּתוֹ מֻטָּל לְפָנָיו, וְאַל תִּשְׁאַל לוֹ בִשְׁעַת נִדְרוֹ, וְאַל תִּשְׁתַּדֵּל לִרְאוֹתוֹ בִשְׁעַת קַלְקָלָתוֹ:
(18) Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar said: Do not try to appease your friend during his hour of anger; Nor comfort him at the hour while his dead still lies before him; Nor question him at the hour of his vow; Nor strive to see him in the hour of his disgrace.
Rabbi Shimeon ben Eleazar was active between approximately 170 and 200 CE, having been the student of Rabbi Me’ir and a colleague and halachic opponent of Yehudah HaNasi. His most famous story is his encounter with an ugly man, found in Taanit 20a-b. He is mentioned a few times in the Mishnah, and more frequently in the Tosefta. The Kaufmann manuscript omits his patronimic.
In our mishnah, R. Shimon ben Eleazar seems to be talking about four different moments in which to be a good friend is to pull back and give space for the person just to experience what is. They are all moments of great emotional weight: anger, loss, desire to connect with God and embarassment. Bartenura and the Gaon of Vilna both reread all those as moments as moments in God’s trajectory in Torah: the anger at the Golden Calf, the destruction of the temple, the vow of not letting Moshe go into the land and God waiting for Adam to be covered before talking to him. Yachin points out that trying to appease someone in anger actually increases anger – as the common saying goes: “there is nothing less calming than someone telling you to calm down”. Trying to console when the loss is fresh actually increases the feeligns of sadness and loneliness. Trying to show loopholes in a vow at the very moment simply makes the person say that they did think of that, and increases the inability of the person to get out of a harshly made vow. Finally, trying to uhold someone in their embarassment simply causes the embarrassment to grow, as when we see someone we admire seeing us in a bad spot increases the feelings of embarassment. Yachin goes on to say that this advice is good for any time you find yourself confronted with people who are doing things in a group: there is no point on trying to talk them into behaving properly, particularly if they are in some celebration such as Simchat Torah, Purim or a wedding. Similarly, he says, getting into discussions of religion with non-Jews, and expressing what you think of a person when someone is praising them, if you know something bad about them is a bad idea: put your hand on your mouth and say nothing, follow the counsel in Prov. 9:9 and Prov. 23:9. Derech Chayim points out that it is complete foolishness to jump in to make something better and end up making it even worse – and all the four examples are but examples of this one thing.
(יט) שְׁמוּאֵל הַקָּטָן אוֹמֵר, (משלי כד) בִּנְפֹל אוֹיִבְךָ אַל תִּשְׂמָח וּבִכָּשְׁלוֹ אַל יָגֵל לִבֶּךָ, פֶּן יִרְאֶה ה' וְרַע בְּעֵינָיו וְהֵשִׁיב מֵעָלָיו אַפּוֹ:
(19) Shmuel Hakatan said: “If your enemy falls, do not exult; if he trips, let your heart not rejoice, lest the Lord see it and be displeased, and avert his wrath from him” (Proverbs 24:17).
This is one of the most interesting mishnayot of Pirkei Avot, standing out because it is not a mishnah in the regular sense at all. Instead of bringing an opinion, a saying or an interepretation, it is simply a verse from Proverbs. Shmuel HaKatan, to whom this is attributed, is also an incredibly interesting figure. His name means Samuel the Little or the Lesser, and this was either because of how modest he was or because he was just a little lesser than the prophet Samuel. He was active between 80 and 110 CE, in Yavne, being of the second or third generation of Tannaim. His most famous achievement was the composition of Birkat HaMinim, the 19th blessing of the Amidah, which “blesses” the heretics (Brachot 28b-29a), even though none of his halachot survived. The Yerushalmi, in Sanhedrin 1:2/18c/3b brings the story that when Rabban Gamliel called seven sages for a meeting, and eight appeared, Shmuel HaKatan said he was the one that arrived without an invitation so that the intruder would not be publicly humiliated (as we know Rabban Gamliel had no proble doing that). In Yerushalmi Horayot 3:5 /48c/19b we have a story that a bat kol affirms that the Ruah HaKodesh rested on Hillel and Shmuel HaKatan. That story is repeated in Sotah 48b. Ta’anit 25b his self-criticism is evident, and in Yerushalmi Sotah 9:13 / 24b / 45b it is said that he got his epithet HaKatan because he would belittle himself.
The traditional explanation for why this verse is by itself under Shmuel HaKatan’s name is that he would quote it frequently. The meaning is that you should never be happy with the downfall of your enemy, since happiness in this would make God’s anger backfire. In times of national upheaval, fighting and Jewish survival, we should all keep Shmuel HaKatan’s self-criticism and emotional restraint in mind.
(כ) אֱלִישָׁע בֶּן אֲבוּיָה אוֹמֵר, הַלּוֹמֵד יֶלֶד לְמַה הוּא דוֹמֶה, לִדְיוֹ כְתוּבָה עַל נְיָר חָדָשׁ. וְהַלּוֹמֵד זָקֵן לְמַה הוּא דוֹמֶה, לִדְיוֹ כְתוּבָה עַל נְיָר מָחוּק.
(20) Elisha ben Abuyah said: He who learns when a child, to what is he compared? To ink written upon a new writing sheet. And he who learns when an old man, to what is he compared? To ink written on a rubbed writing sheet.
The Kaufmann, the Munich, the Parma and the Cambridge manuscripts all break this mishnah into three, while the Vilna edition combines them. Elisha ben Abuya is a sage also known as Acher, the Other, and his story is intertwined with Rabbi Akiva’s, of whom he was a disciple, and R. Me’ir’s, whom he taught. He was active between 110 and 135 CE. You can read his story in the Bavli Hagiga 14b-15b. The theological underpinings of his heresy are found in Kiddushin 39b. The Yerushalmi brings its version in Hagiga 2:1/77b-c/9a-b – all of the stories make the core of the excellent book “As a Driven Leaf” by Milton Steinberg, which combines all this in a philosophical exploration. In Hebrew, the book Masechet Tehom (Tractate of the Void), by Ayal Hayut-man does something similar. Avot deRabi Natan 24 brings beautiful Torah attributed to Elisha ben Abuya, and brings this mishnah’s words under the name of Rabbi Nehorai.
Our mishnah brings the idea that learning as an older person is hard, as it is similar to writing a palimpsest (a manuscript where the first material was erased but can still be read). Yachin is among the may that point out that “rubbed” is not an opposite of “new”, and that older students just need more time to understand what a young student can quickly absorb. There are those, like Mishnat Eretz Israel, who see this as an invective against R. Akiva, who apparently only learned to read as an adult. And there are those who say that this is here precisely to point out that Elisha ben Abuya went to learn new things in his old age, and look what happened to him. It is easier to learn when you are a child, but it is not impossible to do as an older person, just harder.
Rav Avi Novis-Deutsch is the initiator of this learning in memory of the massacred in Oct. 7 2023, any connection between the lives of the people to whom the learning is dedicated and the content of the mishnayot is purely incidental.
\רַבִּי יוֹסֵי בַר יְהוּדָה אִישׁ כְּפַר הַבַּבְלִי אוֹמֵר, הַלּוֹמֵד מִן הַקְּטַנִּים לְמַה הוּא דוֹמֶה, לְאֹכֵל עֲנָבִים קֵהוֹת וְשׁוֹתֶה יַיִן מִגִּתּוֹ. וְהַלּוֹמֵד מִן הַזְּקֵנִים לְמַה הוּא דוֹמֶה, לְאֹכֵל עֲנָבִים בְּשֵׁלוֹת וְשׁוֹתֶה יַיִן יָשָׁן.
Rabbi Yose ben Judah a man of Kfar Ha-babli said: He who learns from the young, to what is he compared? To one who eats unripe grapes, and drinks wine from his vat; And he who learns from the old, to what is he compared? To one who eats ripe grapes, and drinks old wine.
We are in the second sentence of the mishnah that the Kaufmann, the Munich, the Parma and the Cambridge manuscripts all break into three, while the Vilna edition combines them. This second part is brought by a certain Rabbi Yosi ben Yehudah Ish meKfar haBavli, a man from the Babylonian field, it is assumed that he was of the fifth generation of tannaim, active between 135 and 170 CE. This title is given to him to distinguish him from another sage named Yosi who lived in the same period, but whose father was R. Yehuda bar Ilai. Regarding this sage, besides knowing that he – or his parents – came from Babylonia, we know almost nothing. This is his only sentence in the Mishnah and indeed in all rabbinic literature. There is another sage from the same area mentioned in masechet Eduyot, R. Nehuniah ben Elinatan, but he is also only mentioned there and nowehere else.
Regarding the mishnah itself, Rabbi Yosi ben Yehudah Ish meKfar haBavli is focusing not in the age of the student, but in the age of the teacher. This can be read as responding to Elisha ben Abuya’s possible invective against R. Akiva – after all, R. Akiva was an older teacher. The metaphor for Torah used here is wine, which comes from a connection between two Psalm verses, 104:15 and 19:9 – “wine gladdens the heart” and "the statutes of Ad-nai are upright, gladdening the heart", see Shir HaShirim Rabbah 1:2, where Torah is compared to water, milk, honey and wine. Another midrash that des the same is Sifrei Devarim 48:2 on parashat Ekev, as brought by the Vilna Gaon. In this mishnah Torah is also compared to grapes. Just as wine gets better with age, says R. Yosi ben Yehudah, so too Torah; just as grapes need to be ripen to be eaten, so too Torah. Note that new wine and unripened grapes are edible, they are simply not pleasant or tasty. Bartenura will add that wine straight from the vat has sediments in it, and so too Torah of young teachers is mixed with questions. Yachin affirms that the question here is depth of Torah – young teachers are superficial in their understanding, they are sharp before understanding all the ramifications of what they are saying.
רַבִּי אוֹמֵר, אַל תִּסְתַּכֵּל בַּקַּנְקַן, אֶלָּא בְמַה שֶּׁיֶּשׁ בּוֹ. יֵשׁ קַנְקַן חָדָשׁ מָלֵא יָשָׁן, וְיָשָׁן שֶׁאֲפִלּוּ חָדָשׁ אֵין בּוֹ:
(20) Rabbi said: don’t look at the container but at that which is in it: there is a new container full of old wine, and an old [container] in which there is not even new [wine].
We are in the third sentence of the mishnah that the Kaufmann, the Munich, the Parma and the Cambridge manuscripts all break into three, yet the Vilna edition combines them. This third part brings some resolution to the other two, and so it is understandable why the Vilna editors decided to combine the three mishnayot as if they are responding to one another. The Kaufmann manuscript attributes the saying to R. Meir (the student of Elisha ben Abuyah), while all other manuscripts attribute it to Rabbi Yehudah HaNasi, as does the Vilna edition. I personally think it makes more sense to have r. Meir speaking here, as the discussion was opened by Elish ban Abuyah. The exhortation is that the most important quality in a teacher and in a student is not their age, but the quality of their reasoning and their Torah. Wisdom is one of those things that it is impossible to attribute directly to age. The Zohar, for instance, will have the figure of the Yekukah, the Child, who brings deep comentaries and enlighment to the sages. Yachin will add that this does not mean that the speaker disputes with R. Yosi, but cautions that we should not judge a book by the cover, as we do not learn from making assumptions. He brings Pesachin 111b and Baba Kamma 117a to support this. In Pesachin the story is of a certain talmid chacham who is not really one, to the point that demons make fun of him. And Baba Kamma brings the reverse with R. Nachman, who is someone who looked like a simple person but whose powers of deduction and study prove that he is, actually a talmid chacham.
(כא) רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר הַקַּפָּר אוֹמֵר, הַקִּנְאָה וְהַתַּאֲוָה וְהַכָּבוֹד, מוֹצִיאִין אֶת הָאָדָם מִן הָעוֹלָם:
(21) Rabbi Elazar Ha-kappar said: envy, lust and [the desire for] honor put a man out of the world.
Rabbi Eleazar HaKappar was active between 170 and 200 CE, being of the last generation of tannaim, connected to Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi. It is interesting to know that a lintel with the inscription “this is the beit midrash of Rabbi Eliezer HaKapar” was discovered at Dabura, in the Golan Heights during the Six-Day War in 1967. On the comments you will find a link to a short study that has photos of this lintel. He could be the father of Bar Kappara, which is the Aramaic of “son of Ha-Kappar”, although there are others who believe this is the same person by just another title.
His saying is similar to 2:11 – there, in the name of R. Yehoshua, we read about how negative attitudes towards others (evil eye, evil inclination, hatred for humankind) take a person from this world. Here Eleazar HaKappar tells us that envy, lust and desire for honor do the same. R. Dr. Joshua Kulp sees Eleazar HaKappar as interpreting R. Yehoshua’s ideas. Maimonides will say that those are actual traits of human beings, and that even one of them will be detrimental to our clinging to Torah, and the abandonment of intellectual virtues. Yachin will say that envy is what puts us in danger, as one risks their life to get more money due to envy; lust for bodily desires makes one expend their money and lose their honor; and arrogance will make people also put themselves in danger. Yachin will also say that “the world” means both this and the world to come. Derech Chayim will remind us that is not only 2:11, but also 3:10 brings thikngs that take one from the world. There, we read the words of R. Dosa ben Harkinas – mid-morning sleep, midday wine, children’s chatter and sitting in assemblies of the ignorant. Derech Chayim says that there is no dispute between these three sages – any one of those things can take a person from this world. The Vilna Gaon will uncharacteristically not bring sources, but will mention that these three things can be found in Torah stories: envy from the snake and Kayin, lust from Bila’am and honor from Korach. He will remind us that all those are also found in Proverbs: “envy is a rot to the bones” (Prov. 14:30); “the lust of a lazy person kills” (Prov. 21:25) and “before destruction comes pride” (Prov. 16:18). Mishnat Eretz Yisrael (Safrai, 21st c) is beautiful in its simplicity: “in the simple sense, and it is true according to our experience”.
https://repository.yu.edu/bitstream/20.500.12202/3959/1/Fine--A%20Note%20on%20Rabbinical%20Titles.pdf
(כב) הוּא הָיָה אוֹמֵר, הַיִּלּוֹדִים לָמוּת, וְהַמֵּתִים לְהֵחָיוֹת, וְהַחַיִּים לִדּוֹן. לֵידַע לְהוֹדִיעַ וּלְהִוָּדַע שֶׁהוּא אֵל, הוּא הַיּוֹצֵר, הוּא הַבּוֹרֵא, הוּא הַמֵּבִין, הוּא הַדַּיָּן, הוּא עֵד, הוּא בַעַל דִּין, וְהוּא עָתִיד לָדוּן. בָּרוּךְ הוּא, שֶׁאֵין לְפָנָיו לֹא עַוְלָה, וְלֹא שִׁכְחָה, וְלֹא מַשּׂוֹא פָנִים, וְלֹא מִקַּח שֹׁחַד, שֶׁהַכֹּל שֶׁלּוֹ. וְדַע שֶׁהַכֹּל לְפִי הַחֶשְׁבּוֹן. וְאַל יַבְטִיחֲךָ יִצְרְךָ שֶׁהַשְּׁאוֹל בֵּית מָנוֹס לְךָ, שֶׁעַל כָּרְחֲךָ אַתָּה נוֹצָר, וְעַל כָּרְחֲךָ אַתָּה נוֹלָד, וְעַל כָּרְחֲךָ אַתָּה חַי, וְעַל כָּרְחֲךָ אַתָּה מֵת, וְעַל כָּרְחֲךָ אַתָּה עָתִיד לִתֵּן דִּין וְחֶשְׁבּוֹן לִפְנֵי מֶלֶךְ מַלְכֵי הַמְּלָכִים הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא:
(22) He used to say: the ones who were born are to die, and the ones who have died are to be brought to life, and the ones brought to life are to be judged; So that one may know, make known and have the knowledge that He is God, He is the designer, He is the creator, He is the discerner, He is the judge, He the witness, He the complainant, and that He will summon to judgment. Blessed be He, before Whom there is no iniquity, nor forgetting, nor respect of persons, nor taking of bribes, for all is His. And know that all is according to the reckoning. And let not your impulse assure thee that the grave is a place of refuge for you; for against your will were you formed, against your will were you born, against your will you live, against your will you will die, and against your will you will give an account and reckoning before the King of the kings of kings, the Holy One, blessed be He.
Our mishnah is the last one of the fourth chapter, and in it we continue to read the words of Elazar HaKappar. In this very long mishnah, he brings the certainty of judgment, as part of the natural cycle of a soul. God is depicted as all parts of the justice system: witnesses, judge, claimant and prosecutor. The text continues with the idea that since all of God’s, there is no bribing or perverting judgment. And warns that one should not imagine that death is somehow an escape. Bartenura sees here the insistence that one should talk about God to others. Maimonides makes clear that whereas the circumstances we are born in are outside of our control (including according to Ha-Kappar, whether we are born) our actions and reactions are fully under our control. For such a long mishnah, the manuscripts present very little variance, and this can be atributed to the tight structure of the saying. There are three stances for human life (born, die, revive); three verbs regarding knowing and making known God, eight “He is”, neatly divided into four general ideas and four aspects of judgment, followed by four things that do not exist in God’s judgment but may exist in the human sphere. That structure is then interruped by another “know”, this time a warning, followed by five “against your will” sentences. So 3,3,4,4,4 closing with 5. Impressive, as is the rhythm of the saying, which can be felt if you say this mishnah out loud, following the breaks here:
הוּא הָיָה אוֹמֵר,
הַיִּלּוֹדִים לָמוּת,
וְהַמֵּתִים לְהֵחָיוֹת,
וְהַחַיִּים לִדּוֹן.
לֵידַע
לְהוֹדִיעַ
וּלְהִוָּדַע
שֶׁהוּא אֵל,
הוּא הַיּוֹצֵר,
הוּא הַבּוֹרֵא,
הוּא הַמֵּבִין,
הוּא הַדַּיָּן,
הוּא עֵד,
הוּא בַעַל דִּין,
וְהוּא עָתִיד לָדוּן.
בָּרוּךְ הוּא, שֶׁאֵין לְפָנָיו
לֹא עַוְלָה,
וְלֹא שִׁכְחָה,
וְלֹא מַשּׂוֹא פָנִים,
וְלֹא מִקַּח שֹׁחַד, שֶׁהַכֹּל שֶׁלּוֹ.
וְדַע שֶׁהַכֹּל לְפִי הַחֶשְׁבּוֹן.
וְאַל יַבְטִיחֲךָ יִצְרְךָ שֶׁהַשְּׁאוֹל בֵּית מָנוֹס לְךָ,
שֶׁעַל כָּרְחֲךָ אַתָּה נוֹצָר,
וְעַל כָּרְחֲךָ אַתָּה נוֹלָד,
וְעַל כָּרְחֲךָ אַתָּה חַי,
וְעַל כָּרְחֲךָ אַתָּה מֵת,
וְעַל כָּרְחֲךָ אַתָּה עָתִיד לִתֵּן דִּין וְחֶשְׁבּוֹן
לִפְנֵי מֶלֶךְ מַלְכֵי הַמְּלָכִים הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא:
Rav Avi Novis-Deutsch is the initiator of this learning in memory of the massacred in Oct. 7 2023, any connection between the lives of the people to whom the learning is dedicated and the content of the mishnayot is purely incidental.