Transcript

I just wanted to come back to review something we had said Thursday. Basically, I think we're just reviewing, but I just wanted to make sure that perhaps just to sharpen the point a little bit. We had jumped ahead for a moment to the Gemara

דף מ' עמוד ב' ובאותו הזמן נמנו וגמרו בעליית בית נתזה בלוד. נשאלה שאלה זו בפניהם: תלמוד גדול או מעשה גדול? נענה רבי טרפון ואמר:

ma'aseh gadol. נענה רבי עקיבא ואמר: Talmud gadol. נענו כולם ואמרו: תלמוד גדול, שהתלמוד מביא לידי מעשה. So we asked, how do you reconcile this Gemara with the Yerushalmi in Pe'ah of

וכל חפציך לא ישוו בה, אפילו כל מצותיה של תורה אינן שוות לדבר אחד מן התורה,

which is mashma that when we say תלמוד תורה כנגד כולם in the Mishnah in Pe'ah, it means that Talmud Torah intrinsically is k'neged kulam, not just because Talmud Torah is important as an instrument for kiyum hamitzvos as well. That's certainly true. But lich'ora when we say תלמוד תורה כנגד כולם and

וכל חפציך לא ישוו בה, אפילו כל מצותיה של תורה אינן שוות לדבר אחד מן התורה,

the Yerushalmi in Pe'ah clearly mashma without the fact that Talmud is meivi lidei ma'aseh. Just the fact that Talmud Torah is k'neged kulam. We mentioned also the Gemara from Horayos of

ממזר תלמיד חכם קודם לכהן גדול עם הארץ, כי יקרה היא מפנינים, מכהן גדול הנכנס לפני ולפנים.

And there too there's no mention of meivi lidei ma'aseh, and the clear impression you have is that the Talmud Torah per se. And again, we mentioned that's clearly the understanding of Talmud Torah which underlies Aleph Sha'ar Daled in Nefesh HaChaim. How do you square it with this ma'amar? The emes is that the question is, I don't know, you'd say maybe, I don't know, maybe ma'amarei chalukos, maybe there was a machlokes in Chazal. You look in the Rambam, there's something amazing. I'm not sure if we mentioned this. If you look in the Rambam פרק ג' הלכות תלמוד תורה, so Halacha Aleph is

בשלושה כתרים נכתרו ישראל: כתר תורה, כתר כהונה וכתר מלכות. כתר תורה,

skipping a little bit,

הרי הוא מונח ועומד ומוכן לכל ישראל, שמא תאמר שאותם הכתרים גדולים מכתר תורה? לא, הרי הוא אומר בי מלכים ימלוכו ורזנים יחוקקו צדק וכולו, הא למדת שכתר תורה גדול משניהם.

That's Halacha Aleph. Halacha Beis

אמרו חכמים ממזר תלמיד חכם קודם לכהן גדול עם הארץ, שנאמר יקרה היא מפנינים, מכהן גדול שנכנס לפני ולפנים.

Okay, so there the Rambam's quoting then the Gemara in Horayos, and I don't know, so what do you make of that? ממזר תלמיד חכם קודם לכהן גדול עם הארץ is again as a clear reflection of the fact that he has the Keser Torah. Then Halacha Gimmel

אין לך מצוה בכל המצוות כולן שהיא שקולה כנגד תלמוד תורה, אלא תלמוד תורה כנגד כל המצוות כולן, שהתלמוד מביא לידי מעשה.

So mamash back to back, bin'shima achas, the Rambam quotes what apparently are ma'amarei Chazal which are at odds with each other. Halacha Beis ממזר תלמיד חכם קודם לכהן גדול עם הארץ, not because there's any if the Talmud meivi lidei ma'aseh was the rationale which is responsible for Halacha Beis as well, so the Rambam should've said it already in Halacha Beis. He shouldn't have held off till Halacha Gimmel. It's clear that ממזר תלמיד חכם קודם לכהן גדול עם הארץ is because, as we understood it, it means per se, not because Talmud is meivi lidei ma'aseh. If that's the case, so why in Halacha Gimmel, why do we need it, why does the Gemara in Kiddushin need it to be poshet that Talmud is gadol because it's meivi lidei ma'aseh? The emes is you look in the Rambam, so when you finish Halacha Gimmel, so you see the Rambam answers the question.

אין לך מצוה בכל המצוות כולן שהיא שקולה כנגד תלמוד תורה, אלא תלמוד תורה כנגד כל המצוות כולן, שהתלמוד מביא לידי מעשה, לפיכך התלמוד קודם למעשה בכל מקום.

And emphasis on le'fichach. What do you mean le'fichach? When we learn this Gemara in Kiddushin, right? If you just learn the Gemara without the Rambam: נשאלה שאלה זו בפניהם: תלמוד גדול או מעשה גדול? So was it a practical question or a theoretical question? So theoretical question. It was a question in Hashkafa. תלמוד גדול או מעשה גדול. It doesn't seem to be any halacha lemaise application involved here. And the Rambam says no because תלמוד מביא לידי מעשה, lefichach, and then the Rambam goes on to tell you that התלמוד קודם למעשה בכל מקום and then in halacha daled, he goes and he quotes the Gemara from Moed Katan, the Yerushalmi in Shabbos that

היה לפניו עשיית מצוה ותלמוד תורה אם אפשר למצוה להעשות על ידי אחרים לא יפסיק תלמודו ואם לאו יעשה המצוה ויחזור לתלמודו.

Mashma, and in a minute you'll see it mefurash, black and white in rishonim, what we're saying in the Rambam. But mashma, mashma as follows. The Rambam understood the Gemara that the question of מעשה גדול או תלמוד גדול, the Gemara wasn't asking what the Mishnah in Peah discusses. The Mishnah in Peah is discussing the importance. In terms of importance, so then Talmud Torah is in a class by itself. תלמוד תורה כנגד כולם. Rebbi Tarfon knows that, Rebbi Akiva knows that, all the chachamim know that. The Gemara here is asking something else. In light of the fact that when a person learns it has to be al menas laasos, again, which we've been discussing that Mishnah in Pirkei Avos, when a person learns it has to be al menas laasos, so which is gadol in the sense of which should have a din kedimah? Meaning, if היה לפניו תלמוד תורה ועשיית מצוה. Not which is more important, but that which is more important in light of the fact that talmud has to be al menas laasos doesn't necessarily dictate which should have the din kedimah in

היה לפניו תלמוד תורה ועשיית המצוה. תלמוד תורה ועשיית המצוה.

So the Rambam learned pshat like this. So what Rebbi Tarfon was saying is, yeah, תלמוד תורה כנגד כולם, Rebbi Tarfon agrees with that. Of course תלמוד תורה כנגד כולם. Ella mai, but since Talmud Torah has to be al menas laasos, and עוסק במצוה פטור מן המצוה doesn't apply to Talmud Torah for that reason, as we've discussed, so mimeila any time היה לפניו עשיית מצוה ותלמוד תורה, any time, it should always be maise kodem. That's what Rebbi Tarfon was saying. And Rebbi Akiva said no, it's talmud gadol. Ninu kulom veamru, ninu kulom veamru that as long as the mitzvah is אפשר להעשות על ידי אחרים, so then since talmud is תלמוד מביא לידי מעשה, better that he should learn Torah because even when you measure by al menas laasos, it's more important to learn Torah. Even when you're measuring the Talmud Torah against the standard of al menas laasos, so even then the talmud is important. So that's why in this context you need the sevara of תלמוד מביא לידי מעשה. Because in this context we're not debating which is intrinsically more important. That's certainly Talmud Torah, and not because it's תלמוד מביא לידי מעשה, because intrinsically, intrinsically Talmud Torah is תלמוד תורה כנגד כולם. However, when you want to know halacha lemaise, היה לפניו תלמוד ועשיית מצוה, why is it if even if the mitzvah is אפשר להעשות על ידי אחרים, from the fact that I abstain from the mitzvah, isn't that a stirah to al menas laasos? The answer is no, because תלמוד מביא לידי מעשה. I think in the Rambam it's klar. In the Rambam it's klar because the Rambam says lefichach, right? That this what we're discussing now, the sevara of תלמוד מביא לידי מעשה is what's responsible for תלמוד קודם למעשה. Not the fact that תלמוד תורה כנגד כולם. And then he goes on in halacha daled, he quotes the Gemara in Moed Katan, he quotes the Yerushalmi, he quotes the Yerushalmi where we distinguish between אפשר להעשות על ידי אחרים and אי אפשר להעשות על ידי אחרים. Then I saw that b'emes, if you look in the Tosefos HaRosh, he says it mefurash in Peah, that it's all in the Yerushalmi. Take a look here in the Tosefos HaRosh right here in Mem Amud Beis. Yerushalmi, from six lines before they branch out in the Tosefos HaRosh.

ונמנו התלמוד קודם למעשה. רבנן דקיסרי אמרי הדא דתימא בישישים חכמה מי שיעשה אבל אין שם מי שיעשה המעשה קודם לתלמוד. פירוש זה זה הירושלמי מיירי במצוה עוברת שמפסיק תלמודו מפני המצוה העוברת הואיל ואין שם מי שיעשנה ואחר כך חוזר לתורתו כמו שביארנו במועד קטן פרק קמא.

So the Yerushalmi goes from גדול תלמוד המביא לידי מעשה to hada de'teima that there's mi sheyaaseh, אבל אין שם מי שיעשה not. So it's mefurash what we're saying in the Rambam is right here, the Tosefos HaRosh. The finish of what we're saying in the Rambam that the diyuk here is in terms of עוסק במצוה פטור מן המצוה and talmud torah. When talmud torah and asiyas hamitzvah compete for your attention, which is gadol? The fact that als mitzvah talmud torah is keneged kulam, that's not the question which is being discussed in the Gemara. L'chora, that's I think that's clearly how the Rambam understood the Gemara. I want to discuss one other topic as an outgrowth from this sugya, sort of on the borderline between halacha and aggadah. If you remember back in Daf Lamed when we discussed veshinantam, altikrei veshinantam, אל תקרי ושננתם אלא ושבשתם, so we spent quite a bit of time on the shitas haRambam on Torah she-bechsav, Torah she-baal peh and Talmud, right? And we said that based on what the Rambam says in Perek Alef Hilchos Talmud Torah, so you have to understand what he wrote in the hakdama accordingly. And when the Rambam says that you won't need any sefer other than Mishneh Torah, so what the Rambam means is for the second of the three parts of Talmud Torah, right? For Mishna, which as Rebbi Yehuda haNasi was concerned with means halachos, means halachos, veharaya the Mishna in Ediyos which apologizes for quoting the yachid bein hamerubim, right? As we discussed. So be'emes Mishna means halachos pesukos. It doesn't mean quoting all the deiyos because of elu v'elu. It means halachos pesukos. So the Rambam is saying that you can get from Mishneh Torah. For that, Mishneh Torah is self-sufficient. Ein hachinami, in terms of davar mitoch davar and היך יוציא הדבר המותר והאסור, the process of derivation, of course the Rambam recognized and never intended that Mishneh Torah should somehow or other dislodge studying shas. No question about it. One thing remains though difficult in terms of I mean we live from the Rambam. One thing remains difficult in terms of what the Rambam does in Mishneh Torah and that is hnicha in all the miktzo'os of Torah which are halacha le-ma'aseh. So hnicha that there's need and therefore importance to have halacha pesuka, to have halacha pesuka. The question is in all those miktzo'os which are not halacha le-ma'aseh, which are not halacha le-ma'aseh. So in light of the fact that אלו ואלו דברי אלוקים חיים, in light of the fact that even the view which is shelo kehilchasa is also a chefza shel torah, is also talmud torah, so why did the Rambam, what do we gain by paskening over there? It's not halacha le-ma'aseh. Kodshim and Taharos are not halacha le-ma'aseh, not halacha le-ma'aseh. U'me'idach gisa, the view which is not being quoted is equally Torah to the view which is being quoted. So you see from the Rambam, you see from the premise of Mishneh Torah is, and be'emes the Rav doesn't say it about the Rambam and Mishneh Torah but he actually writes this in Ish haHalacha. The Rav has as follows: meimras Chazal לימוד גדול שמביא לידי מעשה mofiah betzura du-tzdadis. מעשה בתור קביעת ההלכה או הנורמה האידיאלית. Beis, hiskashmuso ba-olam ha-reali. Meaning that meivi lidei ma'aseh, the Rav says is an intentional double entendre in Chazal. It can mean two things and apparently Chazal wanted it to be understood both ways. The second of which, which is the conventional understanding, the simpler understanding, is that talmud gadol is that Talmud leads to implementation, right? In the real world, the talmud gadol results in implementing Talmud Torah results in implementing Torah. I know what food I can eat, I know what food I can't eat, I know what I can do in Shabbos, I know what I can't do in Shabbos. תלמוד גדול שמביא לידי מעשה. The Rav says it means something else also. It also means מעשה בתור... מעשה בתור קביעת ההלכה או הנורמה האידיאלית. And he says what's more that the primary, primarily, Ish Hahalacha מדגיש את המעשה במשמעותו הראשונה which means the first, the first level of understanding of תלמוד גדול מביא לידי מעשה is that even in the purely theoretical, or what the Rav calls the ideal norm, even in the purely theoretical realm there's, it's important that the Talmud be תלמוד גדול מביא לידי מעשה that we establish what the halacha is. Even when it's not nogei'a halacha lema'aseh. Even when it's not nogei'a halacha lema'aseh, so it's and again what we're saying now is Talmud Torah. Mishneh Torah is based on this. This is not a drasha. Mishneh Torah is built on this foundation. Lichora without this foundation, so Mishneh Torah will... we'll see in a minute. Lichora there's one Gemara in Zvachim which seems to contradict it. But otherwise Mishneh Torah doesn't make any sense. That even when when you're not dealing halacha lema'aseh in the sense of implementing, in the sense of carrying out the halacha. Even when you're dealing just on the theoretical level of discussing the halacha, so even then, even then, גדול תלמוד המביא לידי מעשה, that the Talmud Torah should be something which results in establishing what the halacha is. Even when you don't need to apply it. Part of of Talmud Torah again. We ordinarily think that לאסוקי שמעתתא אליבא דהלכתא is again so that the Talmud Torah will also be practical. And the Rav says no, the emphasis on לאסוקי שמעתתא אליבא דהלכתא, to know what the halacha is, is a part of Talmud Torah gufa, not just in terms of making the Talmud Torah practical. Even when you're when you're dealing with Talmud Torah theoretically, not looking to implement it, not looking to implement it, still, still there's an inyan of kvi'as hahalacha. And and that again that emphasis or concern with with establishing what the halacha is, what the norm is, is something which is a part of Talmud Torah again, pure Talmud Torah, even when you're not looking to implement it. So be'emes, that's what Mishneh Torah's built on. That's what Mishneh Torah's built on. They tell a story about the Rav Velvel. Someone once asked him they were talking in inyan kodashim, a machlokes rishonim. So they asked him so how do we pasken? How do we pasken? So Rav Velvel said when the shaylah will be halacha lema'aseh you won't need me to pasken. You'll have you'll have bigger people to pasken when the shaylah will be halacha lema'aseh. So the question is so what what did the Rambam hold about that? What did the Rambam... alright, ממשה עד משה לא קם כמשה, but the but Moshe Rabbeinu, Moshe Rabbeinu what? So why did the Rambam have to pasken? Why did the Rambam have to pasken on things which are which won't be renewed until yemos hamashiach? Til yemos hamashiach. So ella mai, so lichora it's this yesod which the Rav is talking about that the kvi'as hahalacha be'emes is a part of Talmud Torah gufa. It's a part of Talmud Torah gufa and not just the the practical side to try to implement it. The only thing is there's the one Gemara in Zvachim which seems to contradict this. It's not so much a kasha on... it's more a kasha on on the Rav than it is on the Rambam, because again basically... basically what the Rav here is articulating is is the premise of Mishneh Torah. Well here in Zvachim on מ"ד ע"ב there's a machlokes in dinei pigul. Machlokes in dinei pigul between רבי אליעזר משום רבי יוסי הגלילי. Gemara quotes something he says. So then the Gemara says,

אמר רב בר אבוה אמר רב הלכה כרבי אליעזר שאמר משום רבי יוסי.

We pasken that way. Alright, so Rav is after after the churban habayis, after the churban habayis, he paskens like like Rabbi Yosi's din in pigul. אמר רבא הלכתא למשיחא? What do you have to pasken the shaylah for? It's not nogei'a, it's not nogei'a.

הרי קבע לנו הלכה הצריכה לנו לימות המשיח כשיבנה בית המקדש ועכשיו לא נצרכנו לה?

Amar lei Abaye, so we'll see that Abaye originally misunderstood what Rava had said. אלא מעתה קושיות קדשים לא נשני? So what does that mean, so we shouldn't study all of Masechet Zvachim anymore? Hilchasa limshicha? He... So Rava answered him, hachi kamina lach, hilchesa lamma lei? I didn't say why do we have to study it? I said why do we have to pasken it? Why do we have to pasken it? And that the Gemara doesn't have an answer for. So lichora you learn this Gemara sounds like the question we asked. You learn this Gemara sounds like that that psak halacha only belongs only is when you have is only to facilitate the practical implementation. It's not a part of Talmud Torah gufa because that's what the Gemara says, what do you have to bother paskening the shailos of pigul? So the question is so what is the so lichora this Gemara contradicts Mishneh Torah, doesn't it? Doesn't this Gemara you have to I don't know throw out Avodah and Korbanos and Tahara and so Tosafos here has a kasha from several other Gemaras. Tosafos here in Zvachim mem-hei.

ותימא דבריש עשרה יוחסין אמר רב יהודה אמר רב הלכה כרבי יוסי דעתידין ממזרים ליטהר.

So what do you have to pasken, you have to pasken what's going to be, what's going to happen in the future? Are the mamzeirim going to be, are we going to clarify their yichus, are we not going to clarify their yichus? So first Tosafos tries to find a nafkamina for all the Gemaras which seem to pasken hilchos d'mashiach. And then Tosafos says no, our Gemara is da'as yachid. Tosafos says

ונראה דרבי יוסי דוקא דאית ליה הכא ובסנהדרין אין לפסוק הלכתא למשיחא.

But that's not what the Gemara holds. The Gemara really holds that you do pasken hilchos d'mashiach. That's what Tosafos says. That Gemara there is Tanna against Tanna already anyway. They're arguing over not just Amora paskening like the mishnaic Gemara. But is it clear, I don't remember now, is it clear that Rabbi Yosei... You see it's clear that Rav is being machria. But how do you know the Tanna being machria or the Tanna is saying what they think is right? Tannaim the word polmus shel Torah. Asidin mamzeirim litaher, לא עתידין ממזרים ליטהר. So ela mai, so there emerged a machlokes amongst the Tannaim. The machlokes amongst the Tannaim. So they were debating that the same way the Gemara says that they were learning all of Zvachim. But ela mai Rav came along and he gave a klal and said halacha such and such. So Tosafos says doesn't that contradict the Gemara here in Zvachim mem-hei of hilchos d'mashiach? So basically Tosafos at the end Tosafos has two teirutsim, Tosafos has two teirutsim, but the first teiruts in Tosafos is that ein hachi nami it does and the stam of the Gemara rejects this question of hilchos d'mashiach. Lichora you have to say, I don't know, I haven't seen anyone discuss this in relation to the Rambam. Lichora you have to say that Mishneh Torah is built on this teiruts in Tosafos. What's the Briskerva? The Brisker Rav it was a...