Transcript

הוי מתונים בדין והעמידו תלמידים הרבה ועשו סייג לתורה. Let's perhaps focus on the veha'amidu talmidim harbe, at least initially, בלי נדר אם ירצה השם. Rabbeinu Yonah: ke-dat Beit Hillel,

כעניין ששנינו בבית שמאי אומרים אין מלמדין אלא לתלמיד הגון וצנוע וכשר וירא שמים ובבית הלל אומרים מלמדין לכל אדם משל לשישים שיצאו מהם עשרה טובים ועשרה כדי שיצאו שניים ושניים לפי שאינכם יודעים איזה מהם יכשר זה או זה ואם שניהם כאחד טובים. וכה הוא מעשה של הלל שכינס לכל תלמידיו ואמר להם תלמידיי יש כאן כולכם?

Amru lo hen.

אמר לו אחד מתלמידיו כולם כאן חוץ מקטן שבהם. אמר להם יבוא קטן שעתיד הדור להסתנהג על ידו. והביאו לו את רבן יוחנן בן זכאי. הנה כי אין לדחות הקטנים מנגד הגדולים כי הגדולים נעשו תיישים כי הגדולים נעשו או יעשו תיישים.

Probably should be ye'asu, right? Because it's referring to them when they were still ktananim.

ועל עניין זה דרשו רבותינו זכרונם לברכה בבוקר זרע זרעך ולערב אל תנח ידך אם העמדת תלמידים בבחרותך העמד תלמידים בזקנותך הנה כי הרבות תלמידים דבר טוב הוא עד מאוד וזכות הוא לרבים.

So the braisa in Yevamos to which Rabbeinu Yonah is alluding on

ס"ב ע"ב: דתניא רבי יהושע אומר נשא אדם אישה בילדותו ישא אישה בזקנותו היו לו בנים בילדותו יהיו לו בנים בזקנותו שנאמר בבוקר זרע זרעך ולערב אל תנח ידך כי אינך יודע איזה יכשר הזה או זה ואם שניהם כאחד טובים.

Rabbi Akiva omer:

למד תורה בילדותו ילמד תורה בזקנותו היו לו תלמידים בילדותו יהיו לו תלמידים בזקנותו שנאמר בבוקר זרע זרעך וגומר. אמרו שנים עשר אלף זוגים תלמידים היו לו לרבי עקיבא וכולן מתו בפרק אחד מפני שלא נהגו כבוד זה לזה והיה העולם שמם עד שבא רבי עקיבא אצל רבותינו שבדרום ושנה להם רבי מאיר ורבי יהודה ורבי יוסי ורבי שמעון ורבי אלעזר בן שמוע והם הם העמידו תורה

ota sha'ah. So the question is both on what Rabbeinu Yonah's quoting initially, I think what he's quoting initially is אבות דרבי נתן, and then the braisa in Yevamos where it speaks of trying to teach as many talmidim as possible. And in both places Chazal say because you can't really identify who's going to emerge. But what's the obvious difficulty is ein hachi nami so אלף נכנסים למקרא ואחד. echad yotze l'talmud. אלף נכנסים לתלמוד ואחד יוצא להוראה. But you want to teach everyone. You want to reach as many people in teaching Torah as possible, not because it's only by teaching a hundred that you'll get to the one who's going to emerge as a gadol, because you want to teach everyone. You want to teach everyone. And yet in both these places Chazal are reasoning that you need to מלמדין לכל אדם בשביל שייצא מהם עשרה טובים. No, melamden kol adam because every Jew needs and therefore deserves to learn Torah and therefore a melamed has an obligation to reach every Jew באשר הוא שם כפי כוחו. In hachi nami, not everyone is going to turn out to be Rabbi Akiva. So l'chora it follows. I think we spoke, I don't remember, I think we discussed the machlokes between the Saadia and the Rambam in minyan hamitzvos. We spoke about it, yeah? Whether lilmod u'lelamed is two mitzvos, the Rav Saadia has it, or whether it's one mitzvah like the Rambam has it. And at the p'shuta what Rav Saadia says is it's much easier to understand, hagam that there's an obvious overlap, hagam that lilmod is a prerequisite for lelamed, all the, again, areas of overlap and points of contact between lilmod and lelamed, there's two distinct techumim. There's a techum of lilmod and there's a techum of lelamed. And why does the Rambam conflate them into a single mitzvah? So we explained that the yesod of mitzvas Talmud Torah is that a person should serve as a link in the mesorah. And viewed from that perspective, so then lilmod u'lelamed are only two halves of one whole, right? The way a person becomes a link in the mesorah is to receive and to transmit. Lilmod u'lelamed. And if that's the definition of mitzvas Talmud Torah, so then the Rambam's system of counting that lilmod u'lelamed is a single mitzvah, that's the compelling opinion. If mitzvas Talmud Torah is to, if there's an inyan to learn Torah and there's an inyan to teach Torah, so learning l'chud and teaching l'chud. There's a mitzvah to become a link in the mesorah, so then lilmod u'lelamed are only two halves of a whole. Now would that then imply if you have the chachmei hamesorah who were mekabel the mesorah b'shleimusa, do they have a mitzvah to be mak'hel kehillos b'rabim like רבי חנינא בן תרדיון just for the purpose of reaching as many people as possible? Yes, of course. But there's also a chiyuv that they have to be mindful of, of reaching the individual, the ben or b'nei aliya who will be mekabel. Now clearly the the our Mishna is is lefi pshuto. Again, there are other layers and level of understanding which are also correct but none of which eclipses the lefi pshuto is being addressed to the is being addressed to the chachmei hamesorah who who constitute a beis din and therefore they're being given the the directive of hevu msunim b'din. They constitute the Sanhedrin who are who are gozer gezeros and mesaknim takanos, asu syag latorah, right? On the pshat level, on the most basic level which which is never eclipsed, on the most basic level so the Mishna's not talking talking to us. The Mishna is talking to talking to the gedolei chachmei yisrael, those who are charged with the responsibility of din and therefore they're being told hevu msunim b'din. Those who are charged with the responsibility of being mesakne takanos and therefore they're they're they're being given the directive of of asu syag latorah. So here for for those chachmei hamesorah so then ein hachanami, one element of the mitzvah really means that again not to the exclusion of hafatza's torah on a on a large scale and reaching everyone ba'asher hu sham not to the exclusion of that but on the other hand that can't and and shouldn't be to the exclusion of finding the one who's gonna really accept that the mesorah beshleimusa. Maybe I might have thought that that that there's a maybe there's a tension there between those two elements of the of the mitzvah of lamed. The element again of ויקהל משה את כל עדת בני ישראל the element of of of teaching everyone and and the element of teaching the yachid or the yechidei segula who will receive the mesorah beshleimusa. So that's what chazal are saying the emes is there's not really such a tension between the two because you don't know eize yichshar. A person can't can't really know. You know it was yaduah in in Europe ad k'dei kach that they once asked the Beis Halevi what what did he do that most child prodigies used to fizzle? So they asked the Beis Halevi what did you do that Rav Chaim didn't? You know that you know that you succeeded that you know that that extraordinary potential was was realized? So even even when you think you can identify you can't really identify. Beis Halevi answered and kept him hidden, that was the Beis Halevi's answer. And l'chora that's the pshat meaning when the chachmei hamesorah are focused on this dimension of the mitzvah and this is a a central dimension because again mitzvas talmud torah is le'atik hamesorah and that's why velimadatem is one mitzvah so then ein hachanami the reason there's not going to be a thousand people it doesn't doesn't work that way. It's not going to be a thousand people who you know if there are a thousand people in the room the chances that all thousand are going to be maatikei hamesorah beshleimusa the chances are not so good. So maybe maybe the chacham should be more discriminating in in targeting his audience? No, you don't really know. You don't really know. You don't really know mikama sivos. You don't know you don't know mikama sivos. It's meduyak in the lashon hamishna not only mitzad contextually davar halamed me'inyano. whom the Anshei Knesset HaGedolah are addressing, but but it's also meduyak in the lashon of Ha'amidu talmidim harbeh, right? It's not just limdu, lamdu, it's not just, it's not just lamdu, lamdu, it's not just, it's not just למדו תלמידים תלמידים הרבה but it's ha'amidu talmidim harbeh. Right? The le'ha'amid means, again, literally means to, to stand someone on, on his two feet, right? Meaning that he should then carry the the torch to the next generation. It's interesting, the way we have the girsa in Yevamos, so I mean ultimately the diyuk holds up here also the way we have the girsa in Yevamos, but it's not quite as meduyak because the way we have it is that Rabbi Akiva says היו לו תלמידים בילדותו יהיו לו תלמידים בזקנותו. Okay, so it's neither le'lammed nor le'ha'amid, right? It's yehu lo. But another way the Rabbeinu Yonah quotes it is אם העמדת תלמידים בבחרותך העמד תלמידים בזקנותך. Rabbeinu Yonah apparently had here in Yevamos the same, the same lashon that appears in in our Mishnah, le'ha'amid, again, which has that sense that that what we're talking about is not just, just in quotation marks, is not just teaching, but but is more than that. It's it's identifying, it's trying to reach the yachid or or the yechidei segula, which is what's illustrated in that story with with Hillel HaZaken and רבן יוחנן בן זכאי. Because the Mishnah says that with רבן יוחנן בן זכאי, he was katan shebe'kulam, it means he was the smallest of them all. He wasn't, he was not katan in the literal sense, more like he wasn't involved with anything else. Does that mean one can find out if someone is ra'uy to be the... He said, I thought he says differently in Hilchos Mamrim. That's what he said in Hilchos Mamrim? Okay, sorry. I may be remembering incorrectly. Because in Hilchos Mamrim, the Kessef Mishnah asks a kashya that the Rambam says that to, for a Beis Din to overturn דברי בית דין חברו, they have to be gadol be'chochma u've'minyan. So the Kessef Mishnah asks a kashya that kerem reva'i was oleh li-Yerushalayim מהלך יום אחד לכל צד. That a takkana was made that if you lived within a day's commute to Yerushalayim, so then you weren't supposed to be podeh your ma'aser sheni of kerem reva'i. Why? כדי לעטר שוקי ירושלים בפירות. But then the Gemara goes on and quotes a maiseh.

ותניא כרם רבעי היה לו לרבי אליעזר במזרח לוד בצד כפר טבי וביקש להפקירו לעניים.

So he thought that the takkana was still in force after churban ha-bayis. So amru lo talmidav, Rabbi, already נמנו עליך חבריך והתירוהו. Man chaveirecha? רבן יוחנן בן זכאי. So רבן יוחנן בן זכאי after churban when you couldn't eat anyway, so he was matir this takkana. So the Kessef Mishnah asks a kashya, how could רבן יוחנן בן זכאי have been matir the takkana of earlier generations if you have to be gadol be'chochma u've'minyan? So he gives two answers. If in middle of Mincha he goes to sleep, so how could it be that רבן יוחנן בן זכאי, I think it's the Ravad's kasha, no? That the Ravad asked this kasha, that

עיטור שוקי ירושלים בפירות קשה עלי שהראשונים תקנוהו ורבן יוחנן בן זכאי ביטלה אחר חורבן.

So the Ravad's ta'ana is if the ta'am was buttel, then you don't have to be gadol be'chochma u've'minyan to be mattir the takana. But the Rambam says no, even if the ta'am was buttel, you have to be gadol be'chochma u've'minyan to be mattir. So the Ravad asks from that Gemara in Beitza daf hey that how could רבן יוחנן בן זכאי... so the Kessef Mishne sort of elaborates the kasha and says because the Gemara says in Sukkah and Bava Batra that of the shmonim talmidim of Hillel, so the gadol shebechulam was Yonasan ben Uzziel and the katan shebechulam was רבן יוחנן בן זכאי. So if he was katan in his shiur, even in Hillel's and Hillel's shiur takana, in ma'aseh he was number 80 in the shiur, so how could it be that he was gadol from the earlier generations? So the Kessef Mishne has two fascinating answers. The Kessef Mishne's first one is

דילמא קטן שבכולם לא בחכמת התורה קאמר אלא בשאר חכמות שהיו גדולים ממנו.

Teida that the Gemara there in Bava Batra and Sukkah when it talks about רבן יוחנן בן זכאי's chochma, it says that he was a chacham not on the chochmat haTorah,

שלא הניח ממשלות כובסים משלות שועלים שיחת שדים שיחת מלאכי השרת ומעשה מרכבה ובאותן חכמות אפשר שהיה גדול ממנו ולא בחכמת התורה.

That's one answer. No, maybe they were greater than him in the other disciplines but just in halacha, so רבן יוחנן בן זכאי was greater. And once he was the greatest, the greatest, so then maybe the greatest, the greatest of that generation was greater than the earlier generation. And then the other answer the Kessef Mishne gives is

אפילו נימא שגם בחכמת התורה היה קטן מכולם אפשר שהיה גדול ממתקני התקנה ההיא.

No, maybe that was such a dor de'ah, the dor of Hillel and his talmidim was such an exceptional generation that even the katan shebechulam was greater than the earlier generation that mesaken that takana. That doesn't sound so much like the Kessef Mishne dikduk, it sounds like a different style, not so much the Kessef Mishne style, that pshat, no? So there is something interesting in the baraita in Yevamos, there is something interesting that emerges. So the baraita begins by applying the pasuk of

בבקר זרע זרעך ולערב אל תנח ידך כי אינך יודע איזה יכשר הזה או זה ואם שניהם כאחד טובים.

So originally it applies it to having children. And then secondly the baraita applies it to being ma'amid talmidim, to teaching talmidim. So itchen the a little bit of the omek of that is the following. The Gemara in Brachos says that בימים ההם חלה חזקיהו למות, what does it say?

מלכים ב פרק כ. בימים ההם חלה חזקיהו למות ויבא אליו ישעיהו בן אמוץ הנביא ויאמר אליו כה אמר השם צו לביתך כי מת אתה ולא תחיה.

So Yeshayahu tells Chizkiyahu he should give a tzava'ah because he's not going to recover from this illness. But he tells him a davar lashon, כי מת אתה ולא תחיה. What is

כי מת אתה ולא תחיה? מת אתה בעולם הזה ולא תחיה לעולם הבא.

Wow, Chizkiyahu amar lei mai kuli hai? What did I do that was so terrible? So amar lei משום דלא עסקת בפריה ורביה. I mean after the story happened he does teshuvah. So amar lei so Chizkiyahu says to Yeshayahu

משום דחזאי לי ברוח הקודש דנפקי מינאי בנין דלא מעלו.

I saw that there would be reshaim amongst my descendants. Menashe. Amar lei

בהדי כבשי דרחמנא למה לך. מאי דמפקדת איבעי לך למעבד ומאי דניחא קמיה קודשא בריך הוא לעביד.

So what was Chizkiyahu's mistake? Right, Yeshayahu doesn't tell him, you know, you didn't really have ruach hakodesh, you were tapping into some other source and you saw but you didn't know what you were seeing. Yeshayahu doesn't challenge the accuracy of what Chizkiyahu saw. So what was Chizkiyahu's mistake? What was Chizkiyahu's mistake? So itachen Chizkiyahu's mistake, and again it's meduyak b'leshon hagemara, what is very meduyak. Chizkiyahu was not wrong in that you see from what Chizkiyahu says that the mitzvah of piryah v'rivyah is not simply to have children, but to have children who perpetuate Am Yisrael living and following bederech hatorah. So he says it was pointless for me to have children because that wasn't going to be piryah v'rivyah either. It wasn't going to be piryah v'rivyah, so then aderaba so I'm better off, I'm better off not engaging. When Yeshayahu rebukes him, so what does Yeshayahu tell him? Yeshayahu Hanavi tells him you can't pasken shailas based on ruach hakodesh. בהדי כבשי דרחמנא למה לך. What you can't pasken shailas that way. A person has a chiyuv, so a person is supposed to do what he can to the best of his ability.

מאי דמפקדת איבעי לך למעבד ומאי דניחא קמיה קודשא בריך הוא לעביד.

What will be, that's the ribono shel olam's domain. That's not our domain. Our domain is to do what we're mechuyav to do. So he neither challenges his ruach hakodesh nor does he tell him that he had the wrong hagdara of the mitzvah. L'chora a further raya to this would be the gemara has at the end of chezkas habatim. The gemara says that מיום שפשטה מלכות הרשעה from the day that the Roman Empire has sort of spread, v'eina manachas osanu, forget the lashon, but what's the one that's missing here? ואינה מנחת אותנו לעסוק בתורה ובמצוות, and they're making all kinds of harsh decrees that we can't be osek b'torah u'mitzvahs.

דין הוא שנגזור על עצמנו שלא לישא אשה ושלא להוליד בנים.

Really min hadin we should have made a gezeirah that people shouldn't get married and people shouldn't have children. But it's אין רוב הציבור יכול לעמוד בה. So tosafos asks a kasha, what do you mean דין הוא שנגזור על עצמנו not to get married and have children because of the mitzvah of piryah v'rivyah? So tosafos says shema, maybe, maybe what the braisa means is after having had a son and a daughter, so at that point a person shouldn't marry and at that point a person shouldn't have any further children. Tosafos says shema. Shema because it's a mokimta. That's not what the braisa says. The braisa doesn't- okay maybe it's not really a mokimta because obviously the braisa is not going to be oker a pasuk in chumash. So tosafos is mesupak. Is this a cogent pshat in the braisa or not? What's the alternative? The alternative l'chora is exactly this. The alternative is here it's without ruach hakodesh. Here the circumstances were so oppressive that they felt that they couldn't give a proper chinuch. If you can't give a proper chinuch, then there's no mitzvah of piryah v'rivyah. Because mitzvah of piryah v'rivyah is not just to father the children, to bring the children into the world, but to- Then to guide them, instruct them, raise them, be mechanech them along the derech haTorah u'mitzvos. This halakhic understanding of the mitzvos is reflected in the famous Divrei Agaddah in Gemara Sanhedrin that Rashi quotes in Parshas Bamidbar, ואלה תולדות אהרן ומשה, and then it only lists toldos Aharon and doesn't mention Moshe's sons.

ללמדך שכל המלמד בן חברו תורה מעלה עליו הכתוב כאילו ילדו.

Because that's again the correct way that this ma'amar should also be understood, but the point is because that's an essential component of the mitzvas piryah v'rivyah. The essential component of the mitzvas piryah v'rivyah is to teach Torah and to be megadel the children l'Torah u'mitzvos. So kumt ois that when the braisa applies, the braisa back in Yevamos applies

בבוקר זרע זרעך ולערב אל תנח ידך כי אינך יודע איזה יכשר הזה או הזה ואם שניהם כאחד טובים,

so both are talking about a type of mitzvas msorah. Right, they're not identical, one's an msorah of perpetuating Am Yisrael living al pi Torah, and the other is the msorah of talmud Torah b'shleimus. But they're both talking about a mitzvas msorah and that's the common denominator of the two applications that the braisa has for the pasuk. I think the Pnei Yehoshua definitely deals with this question. I think this is the answer he gives. I think it's from the Pnei Yehoshua. If it's not, I mean it's emes and I think it's the Pnei Yehoshua who says it. So Chazal say that talmidim kriuyim banim and that's how you know that v'shinantam that's what allows for the pshat ושיננתם לבניך אלו תלמידיך. שנאמר ויצאו בני הנביאים. The bnei hanevi'im weren't biological children, they were talmidim and they're referred to as bnei hanevi'im. So the second parshah of Krias Shema where we also have the mitzvah of teaching Torah also speaks of the sons, ולימדתם אותם את בניכם. So why do Chazal darshen on banacha eileh talmidecha on v'shinantam in parshah rishona of Krias Shema mash'hein kein the parshah shniya of Krias Shema we take note, there banim lichora means kipshuto and it's talking about the din kadima that a person is

חייב ללמד את בנו קודם בן בנו וכולו. קטן אביו חייב ללמדו תורה שנאמר ולימדתם אותם את בניכם.

So it's talking about one's actual son, biological son.

כשם שאדם חייב ללמד את בנו כך הוא חייב ללמד את בן בנו ולא בנו ובן בנו בלבד אלא מצוה על כל חכם מחכמי ישראל ללמד את כל התלמידים אף על פי שאינם בניו שנאמר ושיננתם לבניך מפי השמועה למדו בניך אלו תלמידיך.

So ולימדתם אותם את בניכם, so there the translation of bneichem is sons and v'shinantam l'vanecha, so there the translation of vanecha is talmidim. So lichora it follows. The Rambam quotes this Gemara at the end of Hilchos Gezeilah. מאימתי מתחיל אב ללמדו תורה? At what age does a father start teaching his son Torah? Misheyat'chil ledaber, from the point at which the child begins to speak,

תורה צוה לנו משה מורשה וגומר ופסוק ראשון מפרשת שמע.

Lechora, velimadtem, that shiur of the mitzvah is nirmaz in ולמדתם אותם את בניכם לדבר בם, right? That when the child is learning how to speak, the learning how to speak should be associated with with a pasuk in Chumash, with תורה צוה לנו משה. Veshinantam levanecha, so veshinantam means two things, right? The Rambam quotes different drashos Chazal in Sefer HaMitzvos, part of his raya that lilmod u'lelamed is one mitzvah. Veshinantam means both to learn and to teach. So veshinantam, before you move on to the next word, also just means to learn. And that's the basis for Chazal's drasha of

שיהיו דברי תורה שנונים בפיך שאם ישאלך אדם דבר אל תגמגם בו אלא אמור לו מיד.

So veshinantam it should be sharp and crisp in the sense of being on the tip of a person's tongue. Im yishalcha adam, but whatever he asks. So veshinantam reflects the chiyuv that to the best of one's ability, one should aspire to and try to implement this to know as much of kol hatorah kulah as possible. But then veshinantam also means to teach. Oh, so lechora where the teaching is framed in terms of kol hatorah kulah, I don't know, that's not necessarily a דרשה לכל נפש. It's not going to be the case that every father has a son for whom that's going to be relevant. So here, where the teaching is conjoined with the kol hatorah kulah, so there it's being addressed to the chacham. And and here's where you find again that the mitzvah is yes, of course you want to teach as many people as possible. But the gedolei chachmei yisrael they also have to reach the yachid or the yechidei segula to whom the veshinantam of שיהיו דברי תורה מחודדים בפיך can also be levanecha that all of it will be transmitted. So that that has to be talking to there banecha means talmidecha. Ledaber bam, that when the child is the boy is first learning to speak, that you're teaching him that already then your mitzvah begins. So there the medubar clearly is to the father and there beneichem should be understood in the sense of sons. But lechora it's there what you again you see this this dimension that we're talking about of ha'amidus talmidim that the veshinantam, the Torah's saying to to the gedolei chachmei yisrael that the veshinantam, your veshinantam should also be levanecha. That clearly means here is where banecha clearly means talmidecha. Okay, let's stop here.