Last week my attention was caught by a striking paragraph in Rabbi Abraham J. Twerski’s popular commentary on Pirkei Avot, Visions of the Fathers, at Avot 4:27 (where Rabbi Meir teaches: “don’t look at the vessel but at what is inside it …”):
…R’ Meir accepted Torah teaching from Elisha ben Avuyah, and … came
under criticism for this. The Talmud explains that R’ Meir had the unique
capacity to “eat the fruit and discard the peel; i.e. he was able to take what
was good from Elisha and reject everything that was tainted with his heretical
concepts. R. Meir was unique in being given this latitude. For everyone else
the rule remains intact: One does not accept Torah teaching from anyone who
does not live a Torah-true life.
If one
assumes that Rabbi Twerski’s statement is correct, it is still appropriate to
ask how far it applies in practice. Here are a few thoughts on the subject.
1. 1. In his
commentary on the Jewish prayer book, Baruch She’amar: Tefillot Hashanah,
Rabbi Baruch HaLevi Epstein addresses the issue of learning from the wicked
(whom, we may assume, are not leading Torah-true lives). Theren he discusses
whether it is proper to open one’s daily prayers with the verses of praise of
the Jewish people first uttered by Balaam. In the course of this discussion—one
of the longest in his book—he lists a considerable number of features of
Judaism that have been learned from less-than-ideal sources. From this we might
infer that it is proper to learn from these sources. It may be that the lessons
we derive from the wicked, as recorded in Tanach, are somehow more acceptable
because they are not the fruit of a personal relationship between teacher and talmid.
2. 2. Rambam, in the
introduction to his Shemonah Perakim, explains why he has chosen not to
cite the sources on which he draws: “By mentioning the name of an author of
whom a particular author might not approve, I might cause him [to reject the
concept, thinking] that it is harmful and that it contains an undesirable
intent”. It is generally assumed that some of these sources are non-Jewish and,
by definition, not leading Torah-true lives. If they were Jewish and were
leading such lives, it is hard to imagine that Rambam would need to issue such
a blanket exclusion.
3. 3. There may be a
distinction between learning halachah and middot. As I have often
mentioned before, the Bartenura points out that many principles of good and
moral behaviour which we hold dear are shared by other nations in the world. To
the extent that Jewish ethical teaching runs in parallel with other cultures it
may be possible to learn from such cultures, even though we should not seek to
learn Torah from them. And if we can learn good middot by observing the
behaviour of non-Jews (e.g. learning to honour one’s father from Dama ben Netina:
Kiddushin 31a) and even animals (Eruvin 100b), should we not be entitled to
learn the same thing from people who do not live Torah-true lives?
I should
very much like to hear what readers have to say on this topic. Do please share
your thoughts!
For comments and discussion of this post on Facebook, click here.
