Our overview of Bereishis and Shemos, focusing in on transformative moments in human history, touched on: Creation, the challenges that led to the Flood and the Dispersion, the selection of Avraham Avinu, the designation of Klal Yisrael during the prologue to Matan Torah, and the commandment and implementation of building the Mishkan following Matan Torah. We have suggested that life is about serving Hashem in and through this world; sechar will come when it does. Every individual should do his best to identify his kochos and use them in service of the klal and the world. In that way, we can all earn the rarefied rank of a soldier in the Great Battalion.
What About Torah?
However, one could argue that this survey skipped the most significant event of the entire period: Matan Torah itself! Each of the previous elements are inextricably linked to the Torah:
Chazal comment on the very first word of the Torah that the world was created “b’reishis — bishvil davar shenikra reishis, for that which is called ‘first,’” one of which is the Torah.
Noting the irregular formulation of yom hashishi towards the end of Creation, Chazal comment that the world was created “on condition” of a later shishi — the sixth of Sivan. On that day, if the Jews would accept the Torah, good; otherwise, the world would return to its primordial condition of tohu va’vohu.
The Gemara (Sanhedrin 97a) breaks world history into three chapters: two thousand years of tohu, two thousand years of Torah, and two thousand years of Mashiach. Rashi identifies the two thousand years of Torah as starting from when Avraham was fifty-two years old and began teaching those around him about Hashem and His Torah.
Waiting to designate Klal Yisrael as the mamleches kohanim v’goy kadosh until immediately prior to nesinas haTorah clearly connects that mission statement with the Torah that the nation was preparing to receive.
The first kli for the Mishkan described in Parashas Terumah is the Aron, the receptacle for the Luchos from Sinai. Ensconced within the Kodesh Hakodashim, the Aron hosts the Shechinah when it comes down to speak to Moshe Rabbeinu, continuing the precedent set on Sinai itself.1
V’talmud Torah K’neged Kulam
One needs to look no further than the Beraisa in Peah, recited every morning after Birchos HaTorah, to recognize the overwhelming significance of learning Torah: Eilu devarim she’adam ochel peiroseihem ba’olam hazeh v’ha’keren kayemes lo l’olam haba, v’eilu hein: kibbud av v’eim, u’gemilus chassadim… v’talmud Torah k’neged kulam.
The Rambam (Talmud Torah 3:1) restates that as “there is no mitzvah among all the mitzvos which is equal to talmud Torah.”
The Gemara in Berachos declares that since the destruction of the Beis Hamikdash, “ein lo l’Hakadosh Baruch Hu ella daled amos shel halachah — the only thing Hashem has in this world is the four cubits of halachah.”
Perek Kinyan Torah, a Beraisa attached to the end of Pirkei Avos, is entirely dedicated to the overarching significance of talmud Torah: “Anyone who learns Torah lishmah merits many things; not only that, it would have been sufficient for the entire world to have been created just for him…and he is exalted and raised up above everything (Mishnah 1)… Every day a bas kol goes forth from Har Chorev and announces: ‘Woe to people due to the insult to Torah!’ For anyone who doesn’t engage in Torah learning is called ‘nazuf — rejected’…there is no free person aside from he who is engaged in Torah learning (Mishnah 2).”
One opinion in Menachos 99b holds that the obligation to learn Torah applies every free moment of a person’s day: v’hagisa bo yomam valaylah should be taken as literally meaning day and night — all day and all night.
What is the significance of Kabbalas HaTorah according to the perspective we’ve been developing? What role does Torah play in the life of a soldier in the Great Battalion?
Osek B’Mitzvah and Osek B’Torah
A deep dive into a surprising halachah will help answer this question (buckle up: some deep analysis ahead).
A well-known principle in halachic triage is the rule ha’osek b’mitzvah patur min hamitzvah — one who is engaged in one mitzvah is exempt from another mitzvah. To use one of the examples from the Gemara in Sukkah 25a, one who is traveling to accomplish a mitzvah, such as to redeem a captive, is exempt from having to sit in a sukkah on Sukkos.
However, according to Moed Katan 9b, this principle does not apply to talmud Torah: If a person learning is confronted by a mitzvah which cannot be performed by anyone else, he must put down his sefer, attend to the mitzvah, and only then return to his learning. Especially in light of the preeminent status we just demonstrated that talmud Torah enjoys, this din is very surprising: how could it be that a “regular” mitzvah could be more powerful than the mitzvah of learning Torah?
Leaving that aside for a moment, the Rambam’s own position on this issue seems to counter this ruling. Whereas in Hilchos Talmud Torah 3:4, the Rambam records the pesak from Moed Katan, he seems to take a very different stand in Hilchos Ishus 15:2. There, the Rambam writes that one is allowed to push off marriage in order to continue learning Torah. What allows for this leniency? The Rambam justifies his ruling by saying: “she’ha’osek b’mitzvah patur min hamitzvah, v’kol shekein b’talmud Torah — for one who is engaged in a mitzvah is exempt from another mitzvah, which is for sure true regarding the study of Torah.” This is, frankly, incredible — while such a line fits perfectly with what we would have expected based on the primacy of talmud Torah in Jewish practice, it goes directly against his decision in Hilchos Talmud Torah! How are we meant to understand this surprising ruling of the Rambam?
Torah Facilitates Practice
Rav Aharon Lichtenstein suggested that this issue depends on understanding the essential purpose of talmud Torah.2 Talmud Torah is not simply a super-mitzvah, one which earns the most “points” in the World to Come. Rather, learning Torah is meant to accomplish a specific goal — most fundamentally, it is meant to lead to observance of the other six hundred and twelve mitzvos. More ideally, it is meant to infuse observance with an understanding of the values and ideals conveyed by the mitzvos. This perspective was expressed by the Gemara in Kiddushin: After debating which was more important, talmud (learning) or maaseh (practice), the conclusion was talmud gadol, she’meivi l’ydei maaseh — learning is great, for it leads to practice. Learning is meant to lead to practice.
Imagine, then, a budding talmid chacham working on a sugyah relating to the laws of kibbud Av v’Eim. Working hard to clarify the nuances of kavod vs. yirah, he scarcely notices his mother walk up to his desk. Finally, he looks up; his mother asks, “I have to head out for a few minutes. Please take a short break and make me a salad for lunch” — a clear fulfillment of kibbud eim, a mitzvah which is ee efshar laasos al yedei acheirim.
If our scholar would respond, “I’m so sorry, Imma, but I need to finish up this sugyah — I can’t really take a break now,” what does that say about his learning? His talmud is not meivi l’yedei maaseh — by refusing to take up the mitzvah that presented itself, he is showing that his learning is disconnected from practice.
In fact, this would be true for any mitzvah, not only for the mitzvah that he was learning about in the moment: If learning is meant to be oriented towards practice, then practice should always trump the learning, at least temporarily. Given that the essential nature of talmud Torah is its connection to maaseh mitzvah, learning which does not yield that practice is actually not considered learning at all. If so, it would be impossible to apply osek b’mitzvah patur min hamitzvah to talmud Torah: by choosing to ignore the mitzvah and continue learning, that itself disqualifies the learning from being considered a fulfillment of the mitzvah of talmud Torah!
That explains the default relationship between learning and mitzvah. The case in Hilchos Ishus, where a person is faced with the choice between continuing to learn vs. getting married, is different: in that situation, he knows that getting married is going to fundamentally change his opportunities to continue investing in his learning (in the language of Kiddushin 29b, “reichayim b’tzavaro v’osek b’Torah — will he be able to remain fully engaged in his learning with ‘millstones’ (the pressure to support a family) hanging from his neck?!”). Due to that knowledge, he is not bypassing the mitzvah, which would entail talmud shelo al m’nas laasos, but merely delaying it until he feels he is ready. To delay without canceling the mitzvah preserves the status of the learning as oriented towards practice, yet allows for greater investment in the learning before going out to apply that learning to active life. In this way, we can harmonize the Rambam in Ishus, which applies osek b’mitzvah to a person learning Torah, with the competing Rambam in Talmud Torah, which codifies talmud Torah as an exception to osek b’mitzvah.
The Nature of Talmud Torah
This fascinating exploration reveals the fundamental nature of talmud Torah: learning is not meant to remain purely theoretical, learned for its own sake, but applied to active life.3 In the words of Yevamos 109b: “Anyone who says they have exclusively Torah, doesn’t even have Torah, as Devarim 5:1 says, ‘v’limadtem… laasosam — and learn them in order to do them.’ One who is involved in practice (asiyah) also has learning (limud), but one who is not involved in practice does not have learning.” The same pasuk is used in Kiddushin 29a to teach that although a father is obligated to teach his son Torah based on the verse in k’rias Shema, “v’shinantam l’vanecha,” if he himself is not sufficiently learned in the basics of halachic practice, he must first teach himself. His first priority must be learning in order to be able to practice properly; only after that is he ready to invest in teaching his children.
Returning to the above statement of talmud Torah k’neged kulam, the Rambam explains that the reason talmud Torah is equal to all other mitzvos is because talmud leads to practice: she’ha’talmud meivi lidei maaseh.4 Talmud Torah is seen as so colossally important because to some extent, every other mitzvah depends on talmud Torah for its proper practice. It serves as the foundation of a life dedicated to avodas Hashem, guided and inspired by the breadth and depth of Torah. That happens in two parallel ways, both of which are necessary: first, through kiyum hamitzvos, and second, by extrapolating from the ethos of halachah to glean guidance on the difficult decisions of daily life.
While the first path is familiar, the second sounds more intriguing. What does it mean to develop an “ethos of halachah”? The Rav develops this perspective on talmud Torah in a little-known sefer called Halachic Mind; we’ll explore it in more depth next week.
See the Ramban at the beginning of the parashah.
See his essay on the topic in his sefer Minchas Aviv.
According to Rav Hirsch, this is the explanation of the Gemara in Nedarim 81a about Birchos Hatorah. The Gemara quotes the passuk in Yirmiyahu 9:11-12 that quotes Hashem’s explanation for why He destroyed Eretz Yisrael: “…al mah avdah haaretz? Al azvam es Torasi asher nasati lifneihem v’lo shamu b’koli v’lo halchu bah.” The Gemara explains that this means the people of that generation did not make Birchos Hatorah before learning. This explanation is surprising; as the Bach (47:3) points out, that seems to be a relatively minor offense, surely not one which justifies destroying the Beis Hamikdash and sending everyone out to exile! Rav Hirsch explains that the lack of a berachah before learning indicates that they were approaching it with the wrong attitude:
Only if we take the Torah to heart and study it as God’s Torah, given to us by God for the engendering of proper thoughts, emotions, resolutions, speech and actions which find favor in His eyes, in order that we may arrange our whole lives in His service, only then are we able to acquire the proper understanding, are we able to live a good life before God…if we are not imbued with this spirit, then Torah study may fail to to achieve its true purpose, which is the sanctification of life on the basis of Torah. In the “baruch” of Birchos HaTorah…we promise to study in such a manner that, with our study and as a result of our study, the will of God will be fulfilled in every aspect of our lives, public and private. (Commentary to the Siddur, Birchos HaTorah)
This explanation fits beautifully with the latter half of the passuk: “and they did not listen to My voice, nor walk in its path.” The “abandonment of Torah” expressed by the failure to recite Birchos Hatorah before learning was in that they did not intend to “hear Hashem’s voice” in the words and apply those messages to their lives.
Hilchos Talmud Torah 3:3. Maharsha to Sukkah 29b, d.h. bishvil arba devarim says the same.