Learning and Teaching
I
The pasuq (Devarim 28:61, parashas Ki Savo) reads, if we would translate it naively (ignoring the point we’re about to see in Rashi):
|
גַּ֤ם כׇּל־חֳלִי֙ וְכׇל־מַכָּ֔ה אֲשֶׁר֙ לֹ֣א כָת֔וּב בְּסֵ֖פֶר הַתּוֹרָ֣ה הַזֹּ֑את יַעְלֵ֤ם ה֙ עָלֶ֔יךָ עַ֖ד הִשָּׁמְדָֽךְ׃ |
Also every sickness and every plague which is not written in this Seifer Torah, Hashem will raised against you until you are destroyed. |
Rashi refers to this pasuq in a comment on Devarim 29:20 (parashas Nistzavim). That pasuq is speaking person who feels they can follow their own will and escape punishment:
|
וְהִבְדִּיל֤וֹ ה֙׳ לְרָעָ֔ה מִכֹּ֖ל שִׁבְטֵ֣י יִשְׂרָאֵ֑ל כְּכֹל֙ אָל֣וֹת הַבְּרִ֔ית הַכְּתוּבָ֕ה בְּסֵ֥פֶר הַתּוֹרָ֖ה הַזֶּֽה׃ |
Hashem will single them out from all the tribes of Israel for misfortune, in accordance with all the sanctions of the covenant recorded in this book of Teaching. |
Rashi there makes a grammatical point that he applies to our opening pasuq. There are two differences between the pesuqim. The first is the punctuation provided by the trop:
- Ki Savo: אֲשֶׁר֙ לֹ֣א כָת֔וּב בְּסֵ֖פֶר הַתּוֹרָ֣ה הַזֹּ֑את – which is not written in the book, this Torah.
- Nitzavim: הַכְּתוּבָ֕ה בְּסֵ֥פֶר הַתּוֹרָ֖ה הַזֶּֽה – which is written in this book of the Torah.
And the other is the gender of the word “this”:
- Ki Savo uses “hazos” in the feminine because the noun is “Torah”.
- Nitzavim uses “hazeh” because the noun is “seifer”.
Rav Meir Simchah haKohein miDvinskzt”l, (Meshekh Chokhmah on our pasuq in Ki Savo, 28:61), uses this Rashi to make a comment that goes to the heart of what learning Torah is about.
|
יעויין רש”י פרשת נצבים כי הטפחה תחת ה”ספר”, ו”הזאת” הוא על “התורה”, לכן לשון נקבה, יעויין שם. |
Look into Rashi on Parashas Nitzavim. … See there, [above]. |
|
דלמאן דאמר “ויכתוב יהושע את הדברים האלה בספר תורת אלקים” (יהושע כד:כו) על שמונה פסוקים מ”וימת שם משה”. |
According to the one who says, “And Yehoshua wrote these things the the seifer Toras E-lokim” refers the [last] eight verses [of the Torah], from “Vayamas Moshe” [on]. |
|
אם כן מיתת צדיקים להגין על הדור, כמו משה, |
If it is so, it is [to teach] that the death of the righteous is to protect the generation. like Moshe. |
|
כתוב “בספר התורה”, אבל לא בתורה עצמה, כי אחרי מות משה אין “תורה”, כמו שאמר (מלאכי ג, כב) “זכרו תורת משה”. וזה עיקר משלושה עשר עקרים. |
It is written [in seifer Yehoshua], “in the seifer Torah.” But it is not Torah itself. After Moshe died there is no more Torah, like it says, “Remember the Torah of Moshe”, and it is an article of faith among the 13 articles. |
According to haRav Meir Simchah, the concept of “seifer Torah” refers to more than the Torah itself. The Torah is that which Hashem gave us via Moshe. We can only get Torah through Moshe, as per the Rambam’s article of faith. However, there is an opinion that the last eight verses of Devarim, which discuss Moshe’s death, couldn’t possibly be written by Moshe — that would be too similar to having Moshe lie. Instead they were transmitted via Yehoshua.
His proof is the grammatical point made by Rashi. The pasuq here is, “בְּסֵ֖פֶר הַתּוֹרָ֣ה הַזֹּ֑את”, which if we parse as per the trope and the gender of “hazos”, becomes “which are not written in the book, this Torah”. Thus Moshe here in Ki Savos can only refering to “Torah” without the “seifer”. Unlike the pasuq in Yehoshua, where he is described as adding to the seifer Torah.”
We are obligated to include in the scroll, in the seifer Torah, not only the Torah but those eight verses as well, to teach us a lesson about how to relate to the death of a tzadiq.
II
The Meshekh Chokhmah continues by delving into what that lesson is.
|
והאמר רב לרב שמואל בר שילת, אחים לי בהספידאי, דהתם קאימנא. |
“Rav said to Rav Shemu’el bar Shilah: Prepare for me a touching eulogy, for I will be there.” (Shabbos 153a) |
|
יבואר בהקדם מה שהאדם קיים במין מצד חומרו ככל הנמצאים השפלים, וקיים באיש מצד נפשו השכלית ככל האישים העליונים וכגרמי השמים. והנה טרם בריאתו היה גם כן שכל נבדל משיג את בוראו כמאמרם בנדה דף ל:, והיה קיים אישיי, וירד לעולם השפל כדי לעשות מצוות מעשיות התלויים בחומר, וכתשובת משה למלאכים: כלום יש בכם גניבה וכו’. ולכן אמרו: הלומד שלא על מנת לעשות [ירושלמי (ברכות א:) פרק היה קורא] נוח לו שנהפכה לו שליתו על פניו (עכ”ל הירושלמי), משום דגם אז היה שכל נבדל משיג בוראו יתברך [קרבן אהרן בהקדמה]. וכן אם מלמד לאחרים, אז לימודו לתכלית, היינו שהוא קיים במין מצד הנפש. ולכן גם הלומד שלא על מנת ללמד אמרו כן: נוח לו שלא נברא וכו’. | It was explained in the beginning that a person exists as a species in his physical aspect like all the lowly existences, and there exists in a person from the aspect of his intellectual soul, like all the lofty Ishim [a type of angel whose name resembles that of “ish“, human] and like the heavenly causes. Before he was created, a person was also a seikhel nivdal [separated intellect; i.e. a pure intellect with no body, like angels; metaphysical] which grasped its Creator. As it says in Niddah pg. 30. [The soul] had personal existence and descended into the lower world in order to do mitzvos maasios [mitzvos that are actions] which require material substance. Like Moshe’s answer to the angels [when they asked that Hashem leave the Torah with them rather than give it to us at Sinai], “Do theft etc… have meaning for you?” Therefore they said, “One who learns but not in order to do, would have been pleasanter that his umbilical cord would have prolapsed in front of his face [and he never came into the world].” (Yerushalmi ch. “Hayah Qorei” [I found it in chapter 1— Berakhos 1:1, vilna 8a, and at Shabbos 1:2, vilna 7b, but not at the stated location in Berakhos ch. 2. -micha]) Because then [before birth] too he was a seikhel nivdal who grasped his Creator, may He be blessed. (Qorban Aharon, introduction) Similarly if he teaches others then his learning has a purpose, which is to preserve the species on a spiritual level. Therefore also, the one who learns but not for the sake of teaching they thus said, “it would have been pleasanter for him not to have been created.” |
|
ואף הקיום במין מצד חומר מצאנו בתורה שכוונתו שיהא קיים במין מצד הנפש, כמו שאמר השי”ת (בראשית יח:יט) “כי ידעתיו למען אשר יצוה את בניו… אחריו”. ולכן אמרו ביש נוחלין (בבא בתרא קטז.): “בכו בכה להולך” (ירמיה כב:י), (ואמר רב יהודה אמר רב) להולך בלא בנים. (אלא אמר רב יהושע בן לוי, הוא דאמר) תלמיד (עכ”ל הגמרא). היינו ששניהם קיים במין ולתכלית אחד. |
Even his creation on the physical level, we find in the Torah that it is for the intent of his preserving the species on a spiritual level. As Hashem (blessed be He) said [of His selection of Abraham], “For I know him, that he will teach his children after him…” (Bereishis 18:19) Similarly, it says in “Yeish Nochalin” [Bava Basra 116a, quoting Yirmiyahu 22:10] “‘Weep for the one who goes…’ Rav Yehudah said that Rav said: the one who goes with no male children. Rav Yehoshua ben Levi said: it is one who goes without a student.” Both preserve the species and to the same effect. |
|
ולכן אמרו בחלק (סנהדרין צט: על איוב ה:ז) “כי אדם לעמל יולד” וכו’, זה ללמוד על מנת לעשות ללמוד על מנת ללמד, שרק לזה יולד, וכמו שבארנו. |
As it says in chapter “Cheileq” [Sanhedrin 99b, on Iyov 5:7] “Man was born to toil” that is the toil of learning in order to teach, learning in order to do. For it is only for this that he was born, as we explained. |
Rav Meir Simcha haKohein miDvinskzt”l first develops this idea, and then returns back to Rav’s funeral instructions and the importance of the last eight pesuqim of the Sefer Torah in the last section.
The Meshech Chokhmah makes a critical statement here: If the purpose of learning was purely for knowledge, then not only is there no purpose in being born, birth actually interferes with that goal. It is easier to learn Torah as a pure intellect, unencumbered by a body. As the medrash tells us, in the womb learning with the angel.
Rather, we are born because the goal of learning is to practice what one has learned, and to teach others.
III
In section I of this study, we saw Rav Meir Simcha haKohein miDvinskzt”l distinguish between Torah, which could only being given via Moshe, and the Sefer Torah, which includes the Torah as well as the last eight pesuqim. Which is how we can even entertain a dispute about whether they were transmitted through Yehoshua after Moshe Rabbeinu’s passing. There is something about the passing of a teacher that is an integral part of the linkage between the abstract Torah and its presence in this world (the sefer). He didn’t explicate what that is, yet.
In section II, the Meshekh Chokhmah says that the value of Torah is in teaching it and performing its mitzvos. Learning Torah “simply” to know Torah is something one could even do better as a pure intellect. Or, as the gemara put it, someone who only learns to know, rather than learns in order to do, is better off not having been born.
And indeed, the central goal a person should pursue in life is the perpetuation of the human species on the spiritual plane. Teaching, and providing people the physical wherewithal to be students and spiritual beings.
|
ובזה יובן מה שכתבתי בחדושי לכתובות על הא דמצאנו בירושלמי ברכות (א:): מי לא מודה רבי שמעון בן יוחאי שמפסיקין לעשות סוכה, לעשות לולב. ובסוכה פרש”י שהולכים ללמוד תורה פטורין מן הסוכה ולולב. ופרשתי תמן דלשימוש תלמידי חכמים – היינו לימוד גמרא – שרי, עיין שם. |
With this, what I wrote in my novellae on [tractate] Kesuvos can be understood that which we find in the Yerushalmi Berakhos [1:2, vilna 8a]: Does not Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai agree that we would stop [learning Torah] to make a sukkah or to set up a lulav? [Does not Rashb”i agree that one must study in order to do, and not to study not in order to do, for someone who studies not in order to do is better off not having been born?] In [BT] Sukkah [25a], Rashi [“sheluchei mitzvah”] explains that those who are going someplace to learn Torah are exempt from sukkah and lulav. I explained there that the gemara is speaking of [traveling to] serve a talmid chakham. (see there) |
|
לפי זה הטעם מופלא, דאם ללמוד תורה, הלא היה יכול טרם שנברא, ועל כרחך רק לעשות. ולכן להכנה דמצוה, היינו עשיית סוכה, גם כן מבטלים דברי תורה. אבל ללמד, אף הכנה דילה גם כן עדיפה מקיום מצוה, דמצות תלמוד תורה גדולה, באפשר לקיים המצוה על ידי אחר, וכמאמר ירושלמי פאה. |
According to this, the reasoning is astounding: If it were about learning Torah, isn’t that something he could do before being born? Thus [learning] is only in order to do. Therefore, for the preparation for a mitzvah, such as the building of a sukkah, we also interrupt words of Torah. However, to teach, even the preparation for [teaching], is dearer than fulfilling a mitzvah. For the mitzvah of teaching Torah is greater because one can only do the mitzvah via someone else, as it says in the Yerushalmi Pei’ah. |
|
וזהו שימוש תלמידי חכמים להבין טעמי ההלכה על בוריה, שאז יוכל ללמד לאחרים. שבלא שימוש תלמידי חכמים אינו יכול ללמד לאחרים, וכמו שאמרו בסוטה (כב.): מבלי עולם – אלה תלמידי חכמים המורים הלכה מתוך משנתם. ומטעם זה אמרו בברכות (מז:) איזה עם הארץ? (אחרים אומרים, אפילו) קרא ושנה ולא שימש תלמידי חכמים (הרי זה עם הארץ) – משום שאינו יכול להועיל לאחרים. |
This is the apprenticeship-service of a sage to understand the halakhah as it was established [i.e. with its underlying reasoning], for then one can teach others and without apprenticeship-service of a sage one is not able to teach others. As they say in [tractate] Sotah [22a], “‘Swallowers of the world’ … — these are the sages who teach halakhah from their study of mishnah [i.e. decided law in without also the mastery principles and having a feel for the mechanics gained through apprenticeship].” For this reason they said in Berakhos [47a] Who is an am haaretz [ignorant peasant]? (Others [i.e. Rabbi Meir, later in life,] says,) “Someone who learned scripture and mishnah but didn’t apprentice to a sage, (is an am ha’aretz) –because [such a person] cannot help others. |
|
ולכך לקיום מצוה מבטלים מלימוד תורה, דעל זה נברא, וזה היה יכול לקיים גם קודם שנברא. וזה שאמר רב (שבת קנג.) “אחים לי”, דרב לימד לאחרים, והרבה ישיבות, וכמו דפרש”י ריש גיטין (ו.) מכי אתא רב לבבל, ובבבא קמא פ.. ולכן רצה שיתקיימו הישיבות והלימוד תורה שקבע בחייו, למען יהיה קיום גם במין מצד הנפש. וזהו “דהתם” (היינו בעולם החומרי) “קאימנא” – מצד הנפש גם כן, והבן. |
Therefore [summing up the “astounding reasoning”], to fulfill a mitzvah we interrupt from learning Torah. For this [the mitzvah] was why he was created, and that he could do even before he was created. And this is why Rav said “eulogize me”, for Rav taught others and many schools. As Rashi explained in the beginning of [tractate] Gittin, “when Rav went to Bavel”, and in Bava Qama he explains [further]. Therefore, he wanted that his yeshivos [that he founded in Bavel] and the Torah study he established in his life would persist so that there would be preservation of the species also on the spiritual level. That is over there (in the physical world) persists on the spiritual level also. And understand this. |
Rav Meir Simchah haKoheinzt”l prioritizes mitzvos as follows:
Among mitzvos, learning has the lowest inherent priority in life, since we could do that even without being born. Learning derives its value from its being necessary in order to be able to do anything else.
Then come other mitzvos.
Then comes teaching. And not just the teaching of facts, but the internalization of modes of thought that can come only through shimush, apprenticeship. This is the spiritual development of the next generation, our entire purpose in having been born.
This was the great truth Yehoshua needed to record in the last eight verses of the Seifer Torah. Just as Rav left behind his seifer, his academy and students. Moshe Rabbeinu was just that — rabbeinu, our mentor. He contributed to the spiritual development of the species, and in that way endures beyond his lifetime and his transmission of the Torah itself.
Afterword
In terms of practical halakhah, the Rambam (Hilkhos Qeri’as Shema 2:5) rules:
|
הָיָה עוֹסֵק בְּתַלְמוּד תּוֹרָה וְהִגִּיעַ זְמַן קְרִיאַת שְׁמַע פּוֹסֵק וְקוֹרֵא וּמְבָרֵךְ לְפָנֶיהָ וּלְאַחֲרֶיהָ. הָיָה עוֹסֵק בְּצָרְכֵי רַבִּים לֹא יִפְסֹק אֶלָּא יִגְמֹר עִסְקֵיהֶן וְיִקְרָא אִם נִשְׁאָר עֵת לִקְרוֹת: |
If one was engaged in the study of the Torah and the time has come to read the Shema, he intermits his study, reads the Shema and recites the blessings before and after it. If one was busy with communal needs, he should not stop but complete them, and then recite the Shema if there is still time to recite [it]. |
Arukh haShulchan (Orakh Chaim 70:6) quotes this Rambam and continues:
|
וטעמו דהא קיימא לן דעוסק במצוה פטור מן המצוה, ואין לך מצוה גדולה יותר מעוסק בצרכי רבים. |
[The Rambam’s] reason is that we have established [the rule that] “one who is busy with a mitzvah is exempt from [another] mitzvah”, and there is no mitzvah greater than being busy with communal needs. |
|
ואף על גב דתלמוד תורה גדולה מכל המצות ולמה מפסיק, זהו דאם לא כן לא יעשה שום מצוה לעולם. והתורה ניתנה ללמוד ולעשות. |
Even though Torah study is greater than all the [other] mitzvos, so [you may wonder] why should he pause it. It is because if not, he wouldn’t do any mitzvah ever, [since Torah study is a constant obligation]. |
|
ועוד: דאטו כשקורא קריאת שמע אין זה לימוד תורה (עיין ירושלמי שבת פרק ראשון הלכה ב)? אבל בשארי מצות לא שייך זה. |
More, when he is reciting Shema, isn’t this itself Torah study? (See the Yerusalmi Shabbos 1:2) But by other mitzvos this reasoning wouldn’t apply. |
|
ואפילו ישאר עת לעשות המצוה אחר כך, מכל מקום כיון שעוסק בה – צריך לגומרה, אפילו יעבור זמן קריאת שמע. |
Even if time would remain to do the [other] mitzvah afterward, in any case, since he is busy with this [mitzvah] he must complete it. Even if [that choice means that] the proper time for Shema passes [in the interim.] |
|
וכן המלמד תורה לתלמידים והגיע זמן קריאת שמע – לא יפסיק, דתלמוד תורה דרבים הוה מצוה באפי נפשה. וכן מצינו ברבינו הקדוש שלא הפסיק, ורק העביר ידיו על עיניו וקרא פסוק “שמע ישראל”, כמבואר בברכות (יג ב) עיין שם. |
Similarly, someone who is teaching Torah to students when the time for reciting Shama arrived, he should not stop. Because public Torah study is a mitzvah sui generis. Similarly we found by our holy Rebbe [Rabbi Yahudah haNasi, compiler of the Mishnah,] that he did not pause [teaching for Shema]. He would only pass his hand on his eyes and recite the [one] verse of “Shema Yisrael (as is explained in Barakhos 13b). See there. |
In the next sei’f (#6), the Arukh haShulchan says that there are more exceptions nowadays than it would seem to the Rambam, because when we are busy with a mitzvah we are generally not as single-minded about it. Which is why, he explains, it is not captured in the Shulchan Arukh (OC 70:4). Still, the Arukh haShulchan says this a factor in decision-making, and so the implied priorities remain.
Notice that as a practical ruling, the Arukh haShulchan holds like Rav Meir Simchah haKohein miDvinskzt”l . Learning Torah does not override other mitzvos, but teaching Torah and other communal needs would.
On a philosophical level, there is an interesting comparison to R’ Shimon haKohein Shkopzt”l’s version of a person’s raison d’être. Both define the purpose of life in terms of our contribution to the greater whole. And the two are significantly different than Rav Chaim Volozhiner’s vision in Nefesh haChaim. At least, as it is usually understood.
To Rav Shimon, this is defined “horizontally”, the community of Jews and all of humanity alive when I am. The opening sentence of the introduction to Shaarei Yosher tells us Hashem “planted eternal life” – the Torah – “within us, so that our greatest desire should be to benefit others, to individuals and to the masses…” And it is fundamental on all levels of interaction — to benefit others with physical support no less or more than spreading Torah.
To the Meshekh Chokhmah as well, the Torah is still about perfecting the world beyond ourselves. But his focus is looking down the generations — “qiyum hamin mitzad hanefesh, preserving the species on a spiritual level.” Even our physical aid is in order to provide people the opportunity to develop spiritually. “And you shall teach your children” includes students because it is the passing down of our values, beliefs and knowledge that is the primary purpose of parenthood, not genetics.
Both visions stand in stark contrast to that of Rav Chaim Volzhiner. In the 4th section of Nefesh haChaim, Rav Chaim teaches that the essence of Jewish life is Torah Lishmah, Torah purely for its own sake. That this clarifies the soul like a miqvah removing impurity, even in ways that go beyond understanding. In the other 3 sections, Rav Chaim Volozhiner draws a picture of man integrated with the metaphysics of the universe — so much so that repairing either requires repairing both.
In contrast, HaRav Meir Simchah haKohein miDvinskzt”l plays down the value of learning Torah just to know Torah for oneself.
Rav Chaim Volozhiner’s notion of a person’s job to improve the world around him is on mystical and metaphysical planes. This would of course include R’ Shimon’s “bestowing good” and R’ Meir Simcha’s notion of advancing the species’ spiritual progress. As Rav Yitzchak Volozhiner writes in the introduction of Nefesh haChaim
|
והיה רגיל להוכיח אותי על שראה שאינני משתתף בצערא דאחרינא. וכה היה דברו אלי תמיד שזה כל האדם. לא לעצמו נברא רק להועיל לאחריני ככל אשר ימצא בכחו לעשות. |
He would routinely rebuke me because he was that I do not share in the pain of others. This is what he would constantly tell me: that the entire person was not created for himself, but to be of assistance to others, whatever he finds to be in his ability to do. |
To Rav Chaim, this concern is expressed through metaphysically repairing the universe for the sake of alleviating others’ pain. Just as the Meshekh Chokhmah believes in the value of learning, even if it’s not to his mind inherent. These are three approaches to the same Torah, after all. But they are different derakhim, non-identical approaches that yield differences in self-image and thus prioritization.
Recent Comments