R’ Elazar ben Azariah is known to most Jews who have attended a few Pesach sedarim as the rabbi whose beard turned white overnight to make him look older, and therefore wiser, than his youthful age suggested. Probably less well known is the pleasingly symmetrical Mishnah he teaches at Avot 3:17:
אִם אֵין תּוֹרָה אֵין דֶּֽרֶךְ אֶֽרֶץ, אִם אֵין
דֶּֽרֶךְ אֶֽרֶץ אֵין תּוֹרָה, אִם אֵין חָכְמָה אֵין יִרְאָה, אִם אֵין יִרְאָה אֵין
חָכְמָה, אִם אֵין דַּֽעַת אֵין בִּינָה, אִם אֵין בִּינָה אֵין דַּֽעַת, אִם אֵין
קֶֽמַח אֵין תּוֹרָה, אִם אֵין תּוֹרָה אֵין קֶֽמַח
If there is no Torah, there is no
derech eretz; if there is no derech eretz, there is no Torah. If
there is no wisdom, there is no fear [of God]; if there is no fear [of God],
there is no wisdom. If there is no knowledge, there is no understanding; if
there is no understanding, there is no knowledge. If there is no flour, there
is no Torah; if there is no Torah, there is no flour.
This note leaves the term derech eretz untranslated.
While in this context it quite likely means “good behaviour”, it does have
other meanings and, in any event, we are not focusing on it here. Instead, we
examine the fourth part of the Mishnah: if there is no flour, there is no
Torah—and vice versa. Why does R’ Elazar say this? What is this all about?
R’ Baruch HaLevi Epstein (Baruch She’emar) scorns the
“going hungry” explanation as teaching nothing we do not already know. Instead,
he hypothesises that “Torah” is the basic material that one must learn, while
“flour” is the refined product derived by analysing and developing it. If there
is no Torah, there is nothing to refine and develop—and if there is to be no
further development in our understanding, there is no great meaning in a Torah
that is only taken at face value.
Other answers have been offered. One is that food only
exists in the merit of Torah study: if Torah study is reduced, its influence
diminishes too, and it is in the merit of this influence that our food is
provided (Alshich); accordingly we should provide the poor Torah scholar with
food, or we will find that, since he has not the wherewithal to learn Torah,
ultimately even the wealthy will be without food (R’ Yechezkel Landau, the Noda
BeYehudah). If people do not study Torah, they may as well be dead (Bartenura).
And if people do not trouble themselves to learn Torah—an activity that
distinguishes man from beast—they are no better than animals and do not deserve
flour, or indeed any other food (see discussions in R’ Yisrael Meir Lau, Yachel
Yisrael and R’ Yisroel Miller, The Wisdom of Avos).
One of the shortest and neatest explanations is that of the Kli
Yakar, R’ Shlomo Ephraim Luntschitz (Al 13 Middot, 3, Miketz),
followed by Gila Ross (Living Beautifully): “flour” and “Torah” are,
respectively, “body” and “soul”. The human condition requires each to be
responsible for the wellbeing of the other. Is this what R’ Elazar ben Azariah
means? I don’t know, but it does seem to me that, if the first three pairs of
concepts in this mishnah can also be explained in comparably simple terms, this
explanation will fit in well.
***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** *****
As an aside, I don’t usually go for cute explanations of
mishnayot that are based on mnemonics such as roshei tevot (acronyms).
That doesn’t mean I disapprove of them; rather, much as I enjoy them, I often
don’t feel that they convey a message with any particular relevance to the
modern student of Avot.
Here’s one that tickled my interest, though. The Ketav
Sofer points out that there are three periods when a Torah scholar must
eat: on Shabbat and on the Festivals he is obliged not only to eat but to do so
with simchah (happiness) and oneg (enjoyment), and on days that
are neither Shabbat nor Yomim Tovim he is obliged to eat in order to survive
and carry on learning Torah. The Hebrew word for flour, קמח (kemach),
alludes to this. The ק
is for Shabbat kodesh, the מ is for mo’ed (festival)
and the ח
is for chol—the regular days of the year.
Check comments and discussions on this post on its Facebook page here.
