The Path to Torah and Taming of the Ego Bava Basra 65-66

The Path to Torah

In continuing the sugya of ayin yaffa, our daf discusses when a sale is made with a generous attitude, which has implications regarding if one sells passage rights to get to the property, even if it may inconvenience the seller. Regardless, all opinions hold that a gift, as opposed to a sale, is granted with a generous attitude.

The Torah is described by the scripture as an acquisition but also a gift (Mishle 4:2):

כי לקח טוב נתתי לכם תורתי אל־תעזבו

For I gave you good acquisition; Do not forsake my teaching.

The Likkutei Yehuda (beginning of Parashas Bereishis) quotes the Chiddushei Harim, that since the Torah is a gift, it surely was given with a generous spirit. And, if it was given be-ayin yaffa, then it follow to reason that a pathway would be generously provided as well. This indicates that every Jew is given his pathway (derech) toward Torah.

So what is the pathway to Torah? It states in Avos (6:4):

כך היא דרכה של תורה, פת במלח תאכל, ומים במשורה תשתה, ועל הארץ תישן, וחיי צער תחיה, ובתורה אתה עמל, אם אתה עשה כן, (תהלים קכח) אשריך וטוב לך. אשריך בעולם הזה וטוב לך לעולם הבא:

Such is the way [of a life] of Torah: you shall eat bread with salt, and rationed water shall you drink; you shall sleep on the ground, your life will be one of privation, and in Torah shall you labor. If you do this, “Happy shall you be and it shall be good for you” (Psalms 128:2): “Happy shall you be” in this world, “and it shall be good for you” in the world to come.

This sounds like hard work. Additionally, we are taught (Berachos 63b):

דבר אחר: ״הסכת ושמע ישראל״ — כתתו עצמכם על דברי תורה. כדאמר ריש לקיש, דאמר ריש לקיש: מנין שאין דברי תורה מתקיימין אלא במי שממית עצמו עליה — שנאמר: ״זאת התורה אדם כי ימות באהל״.

The Gemara offers an alternative explanation of this verse: “Keep silence [hasket] and hear, Israel”; break [kattetu] yourselves over words of the Torah. This is in accordance with the opinion of Reish Lakish, as Reish Lakish said: From where is it derived that matters of Torah are only retained by one who kills himself over it? As it is stated: “This is the Torah: When one dies in a tent” (Numbers 19:14); true Torah study demands the total devotion of one who is willing to dedicate his life in the tent of Torah.

Yet, the prior teaching also assures that you will be “happy in this world and good for you in the world to come”. This paradox can partially be explained by what we saw yesterday, in our blogpost psychology of the Daf Bava Basra 64, that certain enforced dignities actually are helpful and enriching.

I will add an additional perspective. There is a teaching about Torah study that seems to contradict this (Avodah Zara 19a):

אמר רבא לעולם ילמוד אדם תורה במקום שלבו חפץ שנאמר כי אם בתורת ה’ חפצו

Rava says, in accordance with the statement of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi: A person should always learn Torah from a place in the Torah that his heart desires, as it is stated: “But his delight is in the Torah of the Lord.”

This seems like a contradiction because if you enjoy studying, why would it be so difficult and take so much sacrifice. However, if we actually pay attention to the patterns of human behavior, we will notice that great artists and scientists who are driven by the passion of their studies or craft, spend endless hours in their work. There are notable famous virtuosos and masters who would work day and night, sleeping in their workshop or studios while engaged in the quest for whatever curiosity and fascination drove them. Therefore, absolutely one should choose an area of study in Torah that intrinsically appeals to them. It is so broad between ethics, science, mathematics, civil law, mysticism, and psychology that truly it is unlimited in scope. So my advice to you is first find where your interest and curiosity lies, and then don’t be afraid to work hard.

Antidote for The King Size Human Ego

Our Gemara on Amud Aleph quotes a series of verses that describe the unfortunate and complex situation of Yonasan, who due to the deprivations of battle, was starving and took a taste from honey he had found in the forest. Unbeknownst to him, his father King Shaul, had decreed a Fast upon the troops so that they repent and merit divine assistance. Effectively, he had violated his command and was subject to the death penalty. King Shaul, under tremendous political pressure to not show any nepotism and maybe due to a mixture of virtue and his personality, was more than ready to follow through with this execution if not for the nation’s hue and cry that Yonasan deserved a special dispensation. (See Shmuel I:14 through 45.)

Kad Hakemach (Shevuah 1) discusses both the institution of oaths and monarchy, and the social value in them, as clearly endorsed by the Torah. (Full disclosure: This is my interpretation of his words, and choice of juxtaposition of topics. Look at it inside and draw your own conclusions.) He maintains paying allegiance to a mortal king inspires understanding and recognition of the need to respect God as a king. Oaths, which involve co-opting a sacred object and by implication God’s name, are similar in that they represent a secular imposition of a greater divine consecration. The oath is a person placing an object under a ban that ordinarily has no significance, but now is made significant by dint of drawing from the divine power utilized within the oath. This is known in lomdus as matfis bedavar hanadur (for example see Nazir 4b). In any case, this is true symbolically as well as actually. We humans must experience physical things in order to project something comprehensible about the divine.

The rule of law and fear of authority holds civilization together. As it states in Avos (3:2):

Pray for the welfare of the government, for were it not for the fear it inspires, every man would swallow his neighbor alive.

Sadly, in our current geopolitical climate, we see how important this principle is and what happens when it is disregarded in the name of liberty. Personally and politically I’m a Libertarian, but like every system, it requires adjustment and proportion. Government should mix in as little as possible, which is different than saying that it should not mix in. There needs to be regulations to hold people in line, unfortunately.

The idea of relating to God as a king can feel archaic and outmoded today. We are so used to a casual environment. It is difficult for us to even follow through with the prescriptions of Halacha that we pray the Amidah “as if we are standing before a king.” (Mishna Berurah 91:1). The scholarly word for this form of religious worship is known as basileomorphism, relating to God as if He is a king. While this might be difficult to do, think of the time where you were pulled over by a police officer, or you had to go to your boss and ask for a raise, or possibly if you’ve had the experience of testifying in court. All of these experiences still summon up the primeval human dread and archetype of reverence for authority. God is really none of those things. He is not a king, He does not get angry, and doesn’t really need our worship (see Rambam Yesode HaTorah 1:11.) But WE need it in order to summon up the bare minimum of humility, self-control, and submission to that superior being which is kinder than us, more loving than us, and knows better than us.