Avot and educational policy: avoiding extremes

The first mishnah in the first chapter of Avot features, among other things, a statement by the Men of the Great Assembly can be understood in one of two ways. It can mean “raise many talmidim” as well as “raise talmidim a great deal” to ensure that their education in Torah is as full as possible. 

Taken in its first meaning, this statement foreshadows the disagreement between Rabban Gamliel and Rabbi Elazar ben Azariah as to whether it was better to focus on the quality of budding Torah scholars or on their quantity. Rabban Gamliel’s view was that only a person whose external appearance and conduct matches his inner human qualities was fit to pursue the most advanced level of Torah scholarship. Rabbi Elazar ben Azariah disagreed. In his view, the beneficial effect of Torah learning was such that it should be available to anyone who wanted it:  this view might be regarded as support for the principle that a person who commences his learning for motives other than the sake of Torah will eventually end up learning it with the right attitude.  

The dispute between Rabban Gamliel and Rabbi Elazar ben Azariah has a parallel in a dispute between Bet Shammai (who promoted the notion of teaching only an elite cadre of talmidim) and Bet Hillel (whose policy of “Torah for all” prevailed: Avot deRabbi Natan 2:9).  Avigdor Shinan, Pirke Avot: Pirush Yisraeli Chadash, observes that modern educational policy in Israel follows Bet Hillel in this regard.

It seems to me that this argument in all its forms is between protagonists who are pressing for extreme positions that are polar opposites and that they do not consider the possibility of a compromise position that lies somewhere between them. If it can be argued that it is simply not feasible to turn everyone into a talmid chacham, but also that no-one with the inherent aptitude should be deprived of the opportunity to become one, a middle-ground solution should not be hard to find.