YESHIVAT HAR ETZION
ISRAEL KOSCHITZKY VIRTUAL BEIT MIDRASH (VBM)
*********************************************************

PHILOSOPHY OF HALAKHA
By Rav Chaim Navon

LECTURE #10: STUDY AND ACTION

In this lecture, we shall discuss a serious issue, one that is closely connected to the topic of the preceding lecture regarding the place of Torah study in our worship of God. The issue that we shall discuss here is the relationship between study and action, i.e., the relationship between the theoretical study of Torah and the practical performance of mitzvot. In contrast to our previous lectures, the greater part of the present discussion shall focus upon two talmudic passages that deal explicitly with this question.

We shall open with a passage in tractate Kiddushin:

And Rabbi Tarfon and the Elders were already gathered in the upper chamber of Nitza's house in Lod, when the following question was raised before them: What is greater, study or action? Rabbi Tarfon answered, saying: Action is greater. Rabbi Akiva answered, saying: Study is greater. All of them answered, saying: Study is greater, because study leads to action. (Kiddushin 40b)

Our discussion in this lecture will focus on the meaning of the closing words of this passage: "Study is greater, for study leads to action." In what sense is "study greater"? And what is meant by "leading to action"? Does the Gemara mean to say that the value of study stems exclusively from the fact that it leads to action? If this is true, then it would seem to follow that action is the greater of the two, for it is action that is presented as the ultimate goal!

Rashi on the spot writes:

For study leads to action – thus, the two of them are in his hand. (Rashi, ad loc.)

It seems that we should use the words of Rashi to guide us to an understanding of the simple meaning of the Kiddushin passage. Rabbi Tarfon claims that action is greater than study, while Rabbi Akiva asserts that study is greater than action. All those present decide together that study is greater, because it [also] leads to action. That is to say, without resolving the fundamental dispute, which of the two, in and of itself, is greater than the other, practically speaking study is clearly greater than action, for in addition to its independent value, it is also vital for action. In other words, when we engage in study, we get two for the price of one. This is also the understanding of Ri ha-Zaken in his commentary to Kiddushin. Rav Aharon Lichtenstein, Rosh Yeshiva of Yeshivat Har Etzion, understands the passage in this manner as well.

How does study lead to action? We saw in our lecture regarding the significance of Torah study that in addition to the knowledge of the halakhic material that is gained through study, study also heightens a person's commitment to Halakha and his motivation to obey halakhic directives, as was emphasized by the Hazon Ish in particular. Thus, study leads to action not only by providing a person with the knowledge necessary for the observance of the mitzvot, but also by strengthening his commitment and motivation to put that knowledge into practice.

	Many questions remain regarding the significance of the talmudic passage in Kiddushin. That passage must be analyzed in light of a second passage in Bava Kama:

Our Rabbis taught: "And they did honor to him at his death” – this refers to Chizkiya, king of Judah, before whom thirty six thousand men went out with bared shoulders; these are the words of Rabbi Yehuda. Rabbi Nechemya said to him: But did they not do the same for Achav? Rather, they put a Torah scroll on [Chizkiya's] bier and said: This [person] fulfilled what is written in this [scroll]. But surely nowadays we do the same thing! We bring [the Torah scroll] out, [but] we do not put it [on the bier]. And if you wish, say: We also put it [on the bier], but we do not say, [This person] fulfilled [what is written in it].
Rabba bar bar Chana said: I was walking alongside Rabbi Yochanan to ask him about the matter. When he entered the privy, and I asked him something, he did not answer us until he washed his hands, donned tefillin and recited the blessing. And then he said to us: [Nowadays] we even say, [This person] fulfilled [what is written in the Torah]. But we do not say that he taught [what is written in it]. But surely the Master said: The study of Torah is greater because study leads to action! There is no difficulty. This refers to teaching himself, that refers to teaching others. (Bava Kama 17a)

What is the meaning of this passage? The basic interpretations may be found in the Tosafot to Bava Kama and Kiddushin. We shall cite those interpretations as they are more clearly formulated in Tosafot Rabbenu Peretz:

"For study leads to action." Rashi explains: "This implies that action is greater, for that which is inferior is made to hang on that which is superior." And [the Gemara] answers: This refers to teaching himself – then action is greater. But teaching others is greater than action, for it leads the community to action. This is the explanation found in the Kuntrus.
There is, however, a difficulty, for at the end of the first chapter of Kiddushin we say that we may learn from here just the opposite, that study is greater than action, and we don't say that the inferior thing is made to hang on the superior thing!
Therefore, Rabbenu Tam says that, indeed, [the Kiddushin passage] certainly implies that study is greater than action, because action is impossible without previous study. And here the Gemara asks: But surely the Master said that study leads to action, implying that a person cannot act if he did not study. Hence, when we say [about the deceased] that he fulfilled [what is written in the Torah], it is as if we said that he taught [Torah], for how could he have fulfilled [the Torah] if he did not teach? And the Gemara answers: This refers to teaching himself, that is, when we say that study leads to action, we mean that a person cannot fulfill [the Torah] unless he has taught himself. But as for teaching others, sometimes a person fulfills [the Torah] even without having taught others. Therefore we say [about the deceased] that he fulfilled [what is written in the Torah], but we do not say that he taught [what is written there], i.e., that he taught others. For that is greater than action, and greater than teaching himself. 
The She'iltot, however, reads: "And then he [Rabbi Yohanan] said to them," [and no more]. For [Rabbi Yochanan did not want to speak to them and teach them until he had donned tefilin and prayed. This is the meaning of "And then he said to us," i.e., the lesson and the law. And the Gemara asks: Why did he act in this manner, postponing teaching for action? Surely the Master said: Study is greater, implying that study is greater than action, for one cannot engage in action without study. This then is exactly what is stated in Kiddushin. And the Gemara answers: This refers to teaching himself. Surely when we say that study is greater than action, that refers to teaching himself, for a person cannot engage in action unless he has studied. But as for teaching others, action is greater, for he [already] taught himself a great deal. Therefore he would don tefilin and pray before teaching them, for he [already] learned a great deal.
There are those who explain that we should accept the reading found in our texts, as it was explained by Rashi. For he explained here that action is greater, for that which is inferior is made to hang on that which is superior. As for what is learned from here [in Kiddushin] that study is greater – that refers to a person who has not yet studied sufficiently, and he comes to ask what should he engage in first, study or action. [In such a case] we tell him to go and study Torah first, because action is impossible without study, for an ignorant person cannot be pious. And this is what they meant when they said, "Study is greater," for one cannot engage in action which is the main thing without study, as I have explained. And here the Gemara asks well, for here we are dealing with a person who [already] studied a great deal and can act. About him we do not say that he taught, implying that this is greater than action. And so we ask: But surely the Master said: Study is greater, etc. implying that action is greater than study, for that which is inferior is made to hang on that which is superior. Since he can [already] engage in action, for he has already studied a great deal, if so action is greater than study. If so, when we say that he fulfilled [what is written in the Torah], all the more so we should have said that he taught. And the Gemara answers: This refers to teaching himself – that is, in relation to teaching himself, action is certainly greater, and in this respect study is inferior to action. Teaching others, however, is greater than action, for it leads the community to action. (Tosafot Rabbenu Peretz, Bava Kama 17a)

We shall try to impose order on the various interpretations, focusing not so much upon the meaning of the talmudic passage itself, but upon the fundamental issues that were raised above.

RASHI

According to Rashi in Bava Kama, the expression, "Study is greater, for it leads to action," means that in and of itself action – performance of the mitzvot - is the final goal, and not study. (This stands in contrast to what Rashi says in Kiddushin [cited above] that study is greater because it leads to action, and so "the two of them are in his hand," i.e., a person who engages in study will be rewarded both for his study and for the action that will follow from it. According to that understanding, it is impossible to determine which of the two is essentially "greater" than the other). The value of study lies in the fact that it leads to action. Thus, study is the more vital of the two. It is in this sense that the Gemara in Kiddushin says that study is "greater." The Gemara in Bava Kama tries to determine which of the two is in essence greater than the other. In this context action is clearly the greater of the two. Practically speaking, study is more vital; essentially, however, action is the goal. On the other hand, teaching others is even greater than action, for it leads the community to action, and the action of the community is greater than the action of the individual.

"THERE ARE THOSE WHO EXPLAIN"

"Those who explain" develop the interpretation proposed by Rashi. They understand that the term "greater" means "takes precedence" in actual practice. The Gemara discusses how a person is to conduct himself when he must choose between study and action. The decision depends upon the circumstances: a young man is told that first he should study, for if he fails to study, his actions will be partial and flawed. On the other hand, a more advanced student who has already filled himself with Torah should engage in concrete action.[1] This question – what should be given practical precedence at different stages of life – is obviously a very real problem for those studying in Yeshivot Hesder, and for Yeshiva students in general. As is well known, Yeshiva students constitute a population whose participation in political demonstrations is among the highest in the world. This phenomenon should be carefully examined in light of the position of "those who explain."

According to this explanation, as well, the goal of study is to lead to action. We must, however, be precise: "Those who explain" do not argue that study leads to action because knowledge is vital for practical performance, but because "an ignorant person cannot be pious." This explanation is far-reaching: Study leads to action because study enhances a person's fear of Heaven and leads him to devotion to practical Halakha. This is similar to the explanation proposed by Ri ha-Zaken in Kiddushin, who expanded on this point in greater detail. It is difficult to understand, according to this explanation, why this "piety" does not have value in and of itself, independent of the fact that it leads to action.

RABBENU TAM

It is difficult to understand from what is reported here in the name of Rabbenu Tam what is his position on the fundamental question. He writes that study is more important because it leads to action, but it is certainly possible to understand that he agrees with what Rashi writes in Kiddushin that study is more important, because in addition to any independent value it may have, it also leads to action. What stands out in Rabbenu Tam's position is his belief in the exclusive quality of study, for which there is no substitute. According to Rabbenu Tam, the Gemara assumes that if it is said about a certain person that he has observed the mitzvot, it may be presumed that he has also studied, for a person cannot come to action without previous instruction. According to this explanation, study is not only helpful in reaching action - it is vital for the endeavor.

SHE'ILTOT

The position of the Rav Achai Gaon, author of the She'iltot, is exceptional in the following regard: According to him, and in contrast to the positions of Rashi and Rabbenu Tam, independent study is more important than teaching others. Expressed here is a notion of "spiritual egotism," according to which a person is first and foremost responsible for himself, and only secondarily responsible also for others. This is a position that can be rationalized on moral grounds, but it is very problematic, for it justifies the disregard of communal needs for the sake of personal benefit. Many later authorities raised objections to this position from a variety of sources.

As was mentioned above, the simplest understanding of the talmudic passage seems to be that of Rashi in Kiddushin, who proposes that study is greater because a person who involves himself in study gains the added benefit of action as well. According to this explanation, there is no real resolution to the question which of the two is greater, but merely a determination that in any event study is preferable, because in addition to its independent value, it also leads to action. Many sources prove that Chazal were not of the opinion that the sole value of study lies in the fact that it leads to action, but rather that this value exist in addition to the independent value of study. Thus, for example, Chazal write in Sanhedrin:

There never was a rebellious son, nor will there ever be. Then why was it written? Learn and receive reward…. There never was a condemned city, nor will there ever be. Then why was it written? Learn and receive reward …. There never was a leprous house, nor will there ever be. Then why was it written? Learn and receive reward. (Sanhedrin 71a)

Chazal assert that there are certain laws about which it was clear from the outset that they would never be applied in actual practice. These laws were written in the Torah for the sole purpose of being studied. From here it is evident that the value of study does not exhaust itself in study, for in these cases there is no action toward which the study is supposed to lead. A similar midrash exists, which relates to laws that applied in the past and will apply once again in the future, but today are entirely theoretical:

Rabbi Yitzchak said: What is [the meaning of] that which is written: "This is the law of the sin-offering," "this is the law of the guilt-offering"? Whoever engages in the study of the Torah of a sin-offering is regarded as if he offered a sin-offering. And whoever engages in the study of the Torah of a guilt-offering is regarded as if he offered a guilt-offering. (Menachot 110a)

Here too the implication is that study has value even when it does not lead to action. This is only true, however, if we understand the notion of "leading to action" in the simplest sense, that is, that study leads to knowledge which is vital for action. We have already seen that according to "those who explain" (cited by Rabbenu Peretz), study leads to action on a far more profound level, because study leads to the fear of God and to commitment to Halakha. According to this explanation, these rabbinic sources do not contradict the position that the sole value of study is that it leads to action, because even the study of laws that have no practical application today can lead a person to commitment to the world of Halakha in general. We have already pointed out, however, that according to this explanation, it is difficult to understand why the value of study is limited to the fact that it leads to action. For surely the fear of Heaven enjoys importance above and beyond the fact that it leads to the performance of the mitzvot.

We shall now adduce clear and unequivocal proof that action is not the sole goal of study:

Mishna: These are the things for which no limit is prescribed: the corner of the field, the first-fruits, the pilgrimage offerings, the practice of kindness, and the study of the Torah. These are the things of which a man enjoys the fruit in this world, while the principal remains for him in the world-to-come: honoring one's father and mother, the practice of kindness, and making peace between fellow men; but the study of Torah excels them all.
Gemara: "But the study of Torah" – Rabbi Berakhya and Rabbi Hiyya of Kfar Dehumin [disagreed]. One said: Even the entire world does not equal a single word of the Torah. And the other one said: Even all the mitzvot of the Torah do not equal a single word of the Torah (Penei Moshe: which a person studies and meditates upon). (Yerushalmi, Pe'ah 1:1)
	
If even the totality of the mitzvot does not equal one iota of Torah, then the value of Torah study cannot possibly stem – in any sense – from the fact that it leads to action.

We shall conclude with the words of Rabbi Yosef Baer Soloveichik, author of "Bet ha-Levi," who relates to the two aspects of Torah study:

It is well known that there are two aspects to Torah study. One – to know how to act and what to do, for if a person does not study, how will he observe [the mitzvot], and an ignorant person cannot be pious. Even women who are not obligated in the study of Torah are nevertheless obligated to study the mitzvot that they are bound to observe, as we find in Bet Yosef, sec. 47 in the name of the Roke'ah. It is for this reason that they recite the blessings over the Torah. Men, however, have another advantage over women. When women study Torah they do not fulfill any positive precept. It serves merely as a means to the fulfillment of the mitzvot. For women, then, study is a means to the end, which is the fulfillment of the mitzvot, and not an end in itself. For men, however, Torah study is a positive precept in its own right, just like donning tefilin and the like. Thus, it involves two aspects: it serves as a means to an end, and is also an end in and of itself. (Responsa Bet ha-Levi, Introduction)

(Translated by Rav David Strauss)

FOOTNOTES

[1] The Gemara in Mo'ed Katan 9b discusses in practical terms whether priority should be given to study or to action when there is a clash between them. The Gemara concludes that a person should not interrupt his study in order to perform a mitzva, if that mitzva can be performed through others. But if it cannot be performed through others, he should interrupt his study. According to "those who explain," the discussion in our passage relates to the issue on a less specific and a more fundamental level: What are the goals to which a person should devote the various periods of his life? The criterion proposed in Mo'ed Katan – whether the conflicting mitzva can or cannot be performed through others – is not always helpful. For example, can participation in a demonstration be performed through others? How is one to balance the benefit to be derived from such participation against the damage that may result? The alternative criteria suggested here, being more general in nature, may sometimes prove helpful in resolving such questions.