Through the eyes of a child

An Avot Mishnah for Shabbat (Parashat Eikev)

This week’s pre-Shabbat post takes us back to Perek 5.

There’s a highly problematic mishnah at Avot 5:25. Some editions omit it entirely; others place it out of its usual sequence, and there’s no consensus as to who teaches it—is it Yehudah ben Teyma or Shmuel HaKatan? Setting this matters aside, this is what it says:

בֶּן חָמֵשׁ שָׁנִים לְמִקְרָא, בֶּן עֶֽשֶׂר שָׁנִים לְמִשְׁנָה, בֶּן שְׁלֹשׁ עֶשְׂרֵה לְמִצְוֹת, בֶּן חֲמֵשׁ עֶשְׂרֵה לִגְמָרָא, בֶּן שְׁמוֹנֶה עֶשְׂרֵה לְחֻפָּה, בֶּן עֶשְׂרִים לִרְדּוֹף, בֶּן שְׁלֹשִׁים לְכֹֽחַ, בֶּן אַרְבָּעִים לְבִינָה, בֶּן חֲמִשִּׁים לְעֵצָה, בֶּן שִׁשִּׁים לְזִקְנָה, בֶּן שִׁבְעִים לְשֵׂיבָה, בֶּן שְׁמוֹנִים לִגְבוּרָה, בֶּן תִּשְׁעִים לָשֽׁוּחַ, בֶּן מֵאָה כְּאִלּוּ מֵת וְעָבַר וּבָטֵל מִן הָעוֹלָם

Five years is the age for the study of the Written Torah; ten, for the study of Mishnah; thirteen, for being bound by mitzvot; fifteen, to learn Talmud; eighteen, for marriage; twenty, to pursue a livelihood; thirty, for strength; forty, for understanding; fifty, for giving advice; sixty, for sagacity; seventy, for elderliness; eighty, for power; ninety, for being bent over. A hundred-year-old is as one who has died and passed away and no longer counts for anything in the world.

Since the age at which to commence the various stages of a child’s education is a matter that spans both religious and secular concerns, it is unsurprising that there is a vast literature on the topic. But I’m looking at just one question: since the tractate of Avot is not a textbook on educational methodology, what is our takeaway message from a teaching which, prima facie, addresses the way we as Jews should conduct ourselves?

It is immediately apparent that there is no uniform consensus about what “Torah at five” means. Some scholars, including Rambam, the Sforno and R’ Chaim Volozhiner (Ruach Chaim), make no comment at all. Those who do comment tend to have little to say on it in terms of mussar and middot, focusing instead on issues of functional efficacy. Thus the commentary ascribed to Rashi cautions that “five” really means “five and not before” since the study of Torah weakens those who attempt it, the implication being that we should not impose upon a child a greater burden than it can handle. For Rabbenu Yonah, citing the Gemara (Rabbi Shmuel ben Shilat at Ketubot 50a), it’s the age at which a child has the necessary intellectual capacity—though for the Me’iri it’s fine to teach a child the alphabet from the age of three. 

I prefer to look at the instruction of “Written Torah at five” in quite a different way, even though I must concede that this view has neither support nor pedigree. These words are not addressed at five year-old children. Nor are they addressed specifically to their parents. They are spoken to us all. To me they say: “When you open any of the works contained in the canon of Jewish tradition—whether Torah, prophecy, psalms or anything else—look at its words afresh. Read them through the eyes of a five year-old child who has never read them before. Cast aside all your assumptions and your half-remembered opinions that linger on from your previous reading and start again from scratch. That way, having rid yourself of the baggage of your old habits of thought, you can give yourself a chance to see, through the eyes of youthful innocence, those things that were previously hidden in full sight in the too-familiar words of a text you’ve grown too comfortable with”.

Does anyone agree?

If you enjoyed this post or found it useful, please feel welcome to share it with others. Thank you.

For comments and discussion of this post on Facebook, click here.

The Ages of Man -- and Woman?

The following post, which was commissioned for the Judaism Reclaimed Facebook Group, has been developed from two earlier posts (here and here) on this weblog.

The Torah reading for parashat Chayei Sarah commences with a recitation that the life of matriarch Sarah was “a hundred years and twenty years and seven years”. Regarding this unusual mode of expressing the number 127, Rashi famously cites a midrash (Bereshit Rabbah 58:1) to teach that Sarah was as sinless at 100 as she was when she was 20 [the age at which one becomes liable for heavenly punishment], and as beautiful at 20 as she was at 7. Alternatively, she was as beautiful at 100 as she was at 20, and as sinless at 20 as she was at 7 (according to Shadal, this is the original version of Rashi’s source). Either way, we can conclude that Sarah lived a long life, a life in which she remained constant in her virtue and in the quality of her personal appearance.

On the subject of age and advancing years, Pirkei Avot (5:25) has much to say. In particular, it features a lifestyle chronology that begins with learning the written Torah at five and concludes with a person being effectively “out of it” by the time he reaches 100. This Mishnah is plainly addressed to ordinary people and does not describe the biblical patriarchs and matriarchs, whose pre-Torah lives were governed by factors that applied to them but not to us. In Sarah’s case, of the three ages cited in the opening of this week’s parashah, only two of them—20 and 100—are found in the Avot list. While 100 is the age at which one ceases to count for anything, Jewish tradition makes it clear that Sarah continued to take an active part in life. Likewise 20 is the age at which one goes to work (opinions vary as to whether this means making a living or going out to learn Torah), but we do not find that Sarah had a day job at that or any other age. The only other age we learn of in Sarah’s biblical biography is 90, this being the mishnaic age at which physical weakness makes itself manifest—but it is also the point at which Sarah conceives Isaac (Bereshit 17:17).

The “ages of man” Mishnah raises delicate issues in contemporary Jewish thought, since it appears to be addressed only to men. There are at least several possible views one can take. These include the following:

• Women are excluded from the equation because this Mishnah is exclusively a men-for-men teaching;
• Women are not mentioned in this Mishnah because there is no need of a separate list. One only needs to make the necessary changes as one goes along (e.g. substituting 12 for 13 as the age of being bound by mitzvot and deleting 18 as the age for getting married, since this is a men’s mitzvah only);
• There is no need for a women’s list, or it is impossible to create one, since the biological, familial and social factors that govern the course of a woman’s life are more varied and uncertain than those of men;
• The mishnah does not actually address men in general, because it maps out an ideal course only for those who seek a life of Torah study in which everything else is purely incidental. Since it applies so narrowly and embraces only a minority of males, it is not gender-specific and there is no need to consider how, or to what extent, it applies to women

We live in a world in which women’s secular education and Torah study are facts on the ground and it is now nearly 90 years since the death of another Sarah—Sarah Schenirer—who lifted women’s education to a new and hitherto unprecedented level from which it has continued to rise. While classical and modern commentators generally avoid any mention of the absence of a “women’s list”, Judaism Reclaimed (chap. 41) explores the extent to which the biblical precedent of Devorah, and the halachic mechanism which some authorities understand it to have endorsed, can be utilised in the modern era of more widespread and substantial Jewish education for women. It would be good to hear from leading Torah scholars and thinkers as to whether there should be a parallel set of guidelines for women and, if so, as to what it might contain.

The positive side of reaching 50

A recent opinion piece by Barry Katsman in the Jerusalem Post discusses the milestone of one's 50th birthday. He points out how the Zohar explains that the Levites were retired from Temple Service at the age of 50 because their voices no longer sounded so sweet -- and that "the strong fire that is within a man is cooled down".  Indeed, the Sforno adds that the retirement age for Levites is the basis on which we know that man's physical decline commences at 50.  Grim stuff -- but, as the article notes, reaching 50 has a positive side too: according to Avot 5:25, it is the age at which one is qualified to give advice. Of course, this is only a generalisation, but it is a comforting one for those who have reached the foothills of advanced middle age.  And, at 50, whether a person is able to give good advice or not, there is a better chance that he will be listened to. 

The Ages of Woman

The Seven Ages of Woman,by Jacinta Crowley-Long

Last week I posted an item on Yehudah ben Tema's mishnah (Avot 5:25) on the Ages of Man. It has since occurred to me that, had the Tannaim been composing and recording their mishnayot in the early years of the present millennium, there might well have been a corresponding mishnah that lists the Ages of Woman.  We learn that a girl takes on responsibility for the performance of mitzvot at the age of 12, but there is so much more to a woman's life today than accepting the yoke of such mitzvot as she is obliged to perform.  Readers' suggestions are welcomed -- preferably if they are supported by sources drawn from Tanach or the Oral Torah -- as to which other ages should be included.

The Ages of Man

In Avot 5:25, Yehudah ben Tema lists the condition of man from his infancy to extreme old age. It is not as famous as Shakespeare's Seven Ages of Man ("All the world's a stage, And the all men and women merely players ..."), but it is considerably more detailed. It runs as follows:

Age	Significance
5	Learn Written Torah
10	Learn Oral Torah
13	Bar mitzvah
15	Learn Gemara
18	Get married
20	Go out to work
30	Be in full vigour
40	Gain understanding
50	Give advice
60	Reach old age
70	Reach vintage old age
80	Achieve spiritual strength
90	Lose one’s powers
100	Cease to be of account

Naturally, not all these ages are carved in stone. While 13 is an arbitrary age for males, not subject to choice or negotiation, other figures listed above are bound to vary as between individuals: there are precocious youngsters and late developers, people who are swiftly focused on their life challenges and those who drift for many years before they find their vocation. Also, not all of the listed activities are within a person's grasp at any given time: for example, one cannot get married in a vacuum but must find another person -- ideally the right person -- who is prepared to commit.  

Many parents of children in Jewish schools will be aware that the 5-10-15 sequence for learning Tanach, Mishnayot and Gemara is not reflected in the syllabus. Schools often pride themselves on the fact that they introduce teaching of Torah sheb'al peh much earlier than that. Despite Yehudah ben Tema's teaching on the subject, they do so without apology and generally with the consent and encouragement of parents. 

Whether the numbers themselves are still current or not, the sequence of these ages remains important.  For example, while everyone seems eager both to give advice and to have others accept it, it makes sense to acquire understanding first since advice which is based on understanding is inherently more likely to be of value than that which is based on enthusiastic or inspired guesswork.  Getting married before going out to work would seem to be the wrong way round (as Rambam observes in Mishneh Torah: it is more prudent to create an income stream before rather than after clocking up financial burdens) -- but the scenario envisioned here is that bride and groom will spend a couple of years living at the expense of the bride's father while the young couple get to know one another. This ideal is not often put into practice in today's economic and social conditions.

We can ask: if our sages today were to create their own Ages of Man table and did not have Yehudah ben Tema's table as a precedent, what might their list look like?