Pirkei Avos 1:1 – Earlier and Later Morality
Pirkei Avos begins with a chronology of generations from Moses through the Men of the Great Assembly; how the Torah, which was given to Moses at Sinai, was transmitted by him to Joshua etc. The Mishnah then details three ethical directives that were authored by the Men of the Great Assembly.
It is perplexing that no ethical teachings of earlier generations were recorded in Avos. Didn’t the rabbis, elders and prophets of the preceding periods have anything to say that would be worthwhile repeating here in Avos?
The answer to this question will become clear by way of an introduction concerning the function of the entire Tractate of Avos. As was mentioned in the Introduction Avos is known in Aramaic as “Mili d’chesidusa- Matters of extra piety,” because it is dedicated to the teaching of ethics that take us beyond the call of duty. Avos is the road map for delving within the laws of the Torah to find its inner soul. Hence the expression that a Chasid — a title ascribed to one who learns Avos1— goes “lifnim mishuras hadin, within the law.”
One can raise a simple question. Why do we need a tractate that teaches us how to go beyond or within the laws that were given to us by G-d in His Torah?
Parallel to going beyond the law in the sphere of “doing good” are the rabbinic laws that have added on multitudinous strictures and prohibitions as a means to “desist from evil” that were not mandated by Torah law Here too, one may ask, why were the Torah’s restrictions no sufficient? Why did the rabbis have to add on new restrictions?
The Alter Rebbe explains the phenomenon of rabbinic legislation in his work, Likkutei Torah.2 These restrictions were introduced during the Second Temple Era. Prior to that era, the Biblical laws sufficed and there was no need for additional legislation.
With the destruction of the first Temple and the advent of the second Temple, the spiritual caliber of the Jewish people declined and following Biblical laws alone would not be enough to maintain their spiritual equilibrium. As a result of the exile, their emotional faculties degenerated and the obstructions and concealments to the service of G-d intensified. In the Alter Rebbe’s words “They increased so dramatically upon us to the point that we can no longer serve G-d with love. The only way we can arouse the intense love is by the observance of the intricacies of the additional rabbinic laws…”
And while it may seem that these rabbinic laws are of an inferior quality, in truth, the Alter Rebbe explains how these additional laws can be compared to a parent who will discipline his child by adding on additional restrictions out of concern and love for the child, so too, G-d, expresses His love for the Jewish people by adding on additional restrictions and safeguards to make sure they do not falter.
What is true with regard to the restrictions the rabbis imposed as a result of the degradation of the Jews in exile, the Alter Rebbe maintains, is it also true regarding the added ethical teachings that can be found in Avos. Earlier generations were on a higher spiritual plane and their service was of a more complete nature. To function on the appropriate spiritual and ethical level, there was a need for the teachings of Avos to inculcate the positive attitudes such as a “good eye.”
It is now clear as to why no ethical teachings of the generations that preceded the Men of the Great Assembly were recorded in Avos. Only during that generation was there a need for the “matters of piety” contained within Avos.
To be sure, there were always evildoers. From Moses down to the Men of the Great Assembly there were surely individuals whose behavior was wanting. Indeed, there were generations where the majority of the people were wicked. Why then was there no need for the ethical teachings of Avos in those times?
One can gain some insight on this matter from the Alter Rebbe’s discussion in Torah Or. There he states, “In earlier generations the souls were on a higher plane… Because they possessed this superior soul, they were able to draw the inspiration to exercise control over the evil embedded within their soul, from within their own souls. Immediately upon reflection… they will attain the sense of awe… Only the absolutely evil person deliberately allows the evil of his soul to prevail…” For this completely degenerate individual—whose awareness of G-dliness that prevailed in those times was of no avail—the teachings of Avos will also be futile. Conversely, the completely righteous Miketz 41a.
individual of the earlier generations did not need these matters of extra piety that represent the subject matter of Avos.
By contrast, in the words of the Alter Rebbe, “the latter generations consistently do not have individuals who are so wicked, nor do they have righteous individuals who are so righteous… their soul’s own powers are not adequate to gain mastery over the evil…” Therefore, the latter generations need these “matters of piety” and can be helped by them.
(Adapted from the talk of Shabbos Parshas Matos-Masei, Shabbos Mevarchim Menachem Av, 5746, Published in Likkutei Sichos volume 28, p. 283)
Practical Torah
I. “Moses received the Torah from Sinai” are the opening words of Avos. The choice of the first word “Moses” poses a dilemma Moses was no more than an intermediary who brought the Torah from G-d to the Jewish people. Shouldn’t the emphasis have been placed on the role that G-d played in giving the Torah? Similarly, the emphasis on the origin of the Torah from “Sinai” is problematic. Why stress the name of a mountain upon which the Torah was given rather than the Divine source of Torah? The question is magnified in light of the objective of Avos. Unlike the rest of the Talmud, which is devoted to instructing us on the laws of Judaism, Avos, is devoted to teaching us how to go beyond the parameters of the law. Avos is geared to a better understanding of the inner soul of the Torah, so that our commitment to it is not confined to the minimal demands of the law. Accordingly, it would have been more appropriate to underscore the Divine—hence, the unlimited—origin and character of Torah. There can be no comparison between the Torah as it is heard and received from Moses and the way it would have been had we received it directly from G-d. When the Jews asked for Moses to transmit the Torah to them Moses was not so pleased3 because it represented a diminution of the Torah. Why then would Avos—which deals with the Torah in its trans-legal form—minimize the Torah’s sublime nature by stressing Moses role as an intermediary, rather than G-d’s role as the source of Torah? Had the Mishnah been interested in informing us about the legal ramifications of Exodus 20:16. Moses response was “You weakened me like a female.” (Rashi, Deuteronomy 5:24) Torah—as is the case with respect to the rest of the Talmud—one could have understood the appropriateness invoking the role of Moses on Sinai. Moses was the greatest Torah jurist of all and Moses’ legal stature was at its peak when he stood on Mount Sinai, where he stood physically apart from all others, including his brother Aaron.4 By placing the imprimatur of Moses at Sinai on this Tractate, it would have demanded scrupulous observance of the laws contained herein. However, since Avos is not a legal compendium, but a treatise that goes beyond the law, stressing G-d’s involvement would have been more appropriate. A follow-up question concerns the very first teaching quoted in this Mishnah: “Be deliberate in judgment.” After highlighting the process of receiving the Torah and its exalted nature, one would have expected that the first set of teachings—in a tractate devoted to “matters of extra piety” no less— would reflect the uniqueness of pure Torah study. Instead the Mishnah focuses on the applied aspect of Torah—justice. True, the Mishnah does not focus on the law itself, but rather on the extra measure of piety one must apply to the execution of justice (“Be deliberate in judgment”). Nevertheless, it would have been more fitting to commence this tractate with a message that conveys the sublime character of Torah study. To be sure, Torah rulings and the execution of justice are also integral parts of Torah. However, they do not necessarily involve the process of study and analysis. Indeed, those laws that are said to be “Halacha l’Moshe m’Sinai-a law that was given (orally) to Moses at Sinai” generally defy rationale thought. In the words of the Talmud: “If it is Halacha, we shall accept it. If it is a law (based on logical premises) an argument can be advanced.” These laws we obviously observe despite our lack of understanding of them. Hence, in a tractate that highlights the origin of Torah, it would have made more sense for it to commence with teachings that reflect Yevamos 76b. the importance, beauty and sublime nature of Torah study. This question applies to the second teaching of Avos, “Raise up many students.” If the focus of the Mishnah was Torah study, it should have stated, “Teach many students,” which involves the process of learning. On the contrary, to “raise up many students” it does not require formal study. One could “raise up many students” by influencing Jewish children to go to a Yeshiva or other Jewish school where they will be taught Torah faithfully, consistent with the belief that “Moses received the Torah from Sinai.” If so, this second directive of raising many students does not express the singular virtue of Torah study. In truth, this question can be applied to a host of teachings that appear in this first chapter of Avos, including the directive that See Kesubos 103b. Bava Metzia 85b: “How great are the deeds of Chiya.” R. Chiya was known for his practical efforts on behalf of facilitating Jewish education. His efforts did not include formal teaching, yet he was credited with raising many students. appears at the end of the chapter, “The essential thing is the deed, not the study.” How do we reconcile this emphasis on deed with the focus on the exalted nature of Torah that appears at the opening of this chapter? II. When the Torah was given at Sinai, there were two layers of knowledge that were transmitted. Contextually and sub-textually, all of Torah knowledge, the Written Torah and the Oral Torah, including also the novel interpretations that have been introduced over the millennia by some worthy students, were embedded within these Ten Commandments.5 Overtly and textually, however, only practical laws and commandments were articulated in the Ten Commandments. The commandments, “Remember the Sabbath,” “Do not steal” etc. are all straightforward directives as to what we should and should not do. By stating, “Moses received the Torah from Sinai” the Mishnah conveys an important directive: We must approach Torah, first and foremost, the way it was presented at Mount Sinai. One must realize that the ultimate in Torah study—that which makes it complete—is when it has a practical application. Learning Torah with a practical outcome in mind is not only important because of where the Torah study is heading, but the process of study itself is enhanced when one knows that there will be practical ramifications that will follow the academic exercise of study.6 True, even if one were to study Torah without the objective of applying it to one’s behavior it would still fulfill the obligation of Torah study. Avos, however, endeavors to guide us so that we go beyond the letter of the law. From the vantage point of Avos as “matters of piety” the ultimate and complete form of Torah study is when one can derive from it practical guidance. The Mishnah thus continues, “Be deliberate in judgment,” with the emphasis on the word “judgment” that implies a practical matter of law. And the emphasis to “raise up many students” as opposed to: “teach many students” is to underscore the practical angle of teaching Torah. It must lead to producing many students and it can be done either by teaching or by recruiting students and by providing financial support for their study. Likewise, the third directive mentioned in the beginning of Avos, “Make a fence around the Torah” points to the objective of action. Hence the term “Make a fence…” See to it that the Torah study leads to more conscientious observance of the Mitzvos. III. The study of Avos has been divided into two periods. According to one custom it is studied in the six Sabbaths that precedes the Festival of Shavuos, as a preparation for the See Medrash Shmuel on Avos ad loc. receiving of the Torah that we celebrate during this holiday. There is also a second custom, to continue studying Avos throughout the entire summer, up until the last Sabbath before Rosh Hashanah.7
From the book Essays on Pirkei Avos: Chapter One, Mishnah One by Rabbi Heschel Greenberg, adapted from the teachings of the Lubavitcher Rebbe and published by the Jewish Discovery Center.
Footnotes
