The Maharal M'Prague's Explanations on Pirkei Avos
By Rabbi Shaya Karlinsky
http://torah.org/learning/maharal/archives.html
Chapter 2: Mishna 21
He used to say: It is not incumbent upon you to complete the task; and you are
not free to desist from it. If you have learned a great amount of Torah, you are
given a great amount of reward. And your Employer is reliable to pay the wages
of your labor. And know that the payment of reward to righteous people is done
in the World to Come.
(The first half of the Mishna is oft-quoted and well-known, and at first glance, it seems to
make perfect sense. But is a prime example of a Mishna that is really very difficult to
understand when subjected to a deeper and more precise analysis.
(Looking at the Mishna -- certainly without knowing the introduction we provided in the
previous Mishna -- the following obvious questions should trouble us very deeply. 1)
What Halacha is being taught to us? This is a Mishna, which is supposed to be teaching
us laws of behavior. What practical implication is there in the Tanna's lesson? 2) What
kind of task is the Tanna dealing with in the Mishna? If you ARE able to finish the task,
then why SHOULDN'T it be incumbent upon you to finish it?! And if it is a task that is
IMPOSSIBLE for you to finish, then OF COURSE you aren't required to finish it! G-d
never demands the impossible, and I don't need the Tanna to tell me something which I
can figure out for myself!)
(Let's see how the Maharal deals with this very important Mishna.)
This Mishna presents a very difficult problem. "If you have learned a great amount of
Torah, you are given a great amount of reward" implies that your reward is in direct
proportion to the amount of Torah that you learn. Yet in Berachoth (5a) we are taught as
follows. Rebbe Elazar became very sick. Rebbe Yochanan went to visit him and saw
that he was crying. "Why are you crying?" he asked. "If it is over the Torah that you are
not able to learn (due to your illness) we have been taught "One who does more and
one who does less -- [they are equal] as long as their intentions are for the sake of
Heaven." (This implies that the amount of reward is independent of the amount of Torah
learned! A seeming contradiction to our Mishna.)
How do we reconcile the apparent contradiction about whether reward is dependent on
accomplishments or not?
It is possible that our Mishna is referring to the EFFORT EXPENDED and DIFFICULTY
OVERCOME in the study of Torah. One who studies Torah despite great difficulties
receives reward commensurate with the effort invested, as we explained earlier in the
chapter (Mishna 1). But certainly, if we compare one person who masters a large
quantity of Torah over the course of a year, with another person who masters less
Torah while having devoted the same amount of effort over the same amount of time,
they will both receive equal reward.
This approach (that our Mishna deals with the reward for effort and overcoming
difficulty) enables us to understand the Mishna which served as the source for Rebbe
Yochanan's consolation to Rebbe Elazar.
We are taught (Menachoth 110a): It is written by the Olah offering of an animal (Vayikra
1:9) "A burnt offering [providing] a satisfying aroma to G-d." And it is written by the Olah
offering of a bird "...a satisfying aroma to G-d." And it is written by the Olah offering of
meal "...a satisfying aroma to G- d." (Despite the large difference in the value of the
different sacrifices, the Torah uses identical language to describe the Divine satisfaction
each of them created.) This is to teach you that one who does more and one who does
less -- [they are equal before G-d] as long as their intentions are for the sake of Heaven.
It doesn't mean that the reward for bringing any one of the three sacrifices is identical to
any other one. For if this were true, why would anyone bring an (expensive) animal
when less expensive sacrifices can create identical results! What it means is that the
rich person who brings an expensive animal sacrifice doesn't receive more reward than
a poor person who brought a less expensive bird sacrifice or meal offering. Since it was
as difficult (if not more so!) for the poor person to bring a meal offering as it was for the
rich person to bring an animal sacrifice, both offerings are considered equal (despite the
greater absolute cost of the animal). But if the poor person brings an animal sacrifice (a
VERY difficult thing for him to do) his act is certainly considered superior to the rich
person who brought that same sacrifice, since it required much greater effort and cost
on the part of the poor person. The equality is between the rich person who brings an
animal sacrifice and the poor person who brings a bird or a meal offering, since each is
judged according to the level of difficulty and effort expended in performing the Mitzvah.
Therefore, one who wasn't able to master a large quantity of Torah, but he invested
tremendous time, effort and sacrifice in the little that he did master, will receive the
same great reward as one who mastered great amounts of Torah with an identical
investment of time and effort.
(The lesson of the Mishna is clear. G-d doesn't judge an act simply on absolute terms. It
is judged by how difficult it is for you to do it. Giving an $18 check to charity could be
much more difficult for one person than giving $180 is for another person. Without a
doubt, G-d views the $18 of charity as a bigger Mitzvah, deserving of greater reward,
than the $180. One who observes the laws of Kashruth in an environment where
Kosher food is not readily available receives greater reward than one would get for
observing those laws, even with a higher level of stringency, in a time and place where
every delicacy is available in "glatt Kosher" form. A person who must resist his
upbringing and social pressure to keep a Mitzvah receives greater reward than a person
whose family acceptance and social status are enhanced by keeping that Mitzvah. )
According to this understanding, the language of the Mishna means "If you studied
Torah very much," rather than "If you studied much Torah." (The "much" is an adverb,
modifying the verb of studying, rather than an adjective modifying the noun of Torah.)
However, this implication isn't compelling, since it would have been better had the
Tanna chosen the phrase "If you STRUGGLED greatly in Torah" rather "STUDIED."
Additionally, this phrase seems to be built on the previous lesson which taught "It is not
incumbent upon you to finish the task." Why does the Tanna follow this lesson, which
tells us that we aren't required to finish the task, with a lesson telling us that we receive
great reward for studying the Torah? It seems as if the Tanna is teaching that you
receive reward for what you accomplish, even though you aren't required to complete
the task. What is the connection between receiving great reward and NOT being
required to finish the task?! (The answer to this question is not clearly answered now,
but will become apparent further on.)
Despite the above textual difficulties, it appears clear that the Tanna's intention is to
teach us that we receive great reward commensurate with the effort invested in the
study of Torah, and since the usual way that people toil in Torah is (usually) through its
STUDY, the Tanna used the language of studying Torah to refer to the toil.
According to what we explained earlier (Ch. 2, Mishna 1, parts 2 and 3) that there are
two different system of reward, one for the effort and for the action itself, things become
very clear.
Rebbe Yochanan was telling Rebbe Elazar that since one who does more and one who
does less are equal before G-d if there intentions were equally for the sake of Heaven,
the fact that you weren't able to learn Torah shouldn't depress you, since you are given
reward commensurate with the effort invested and the difficulty overcome to study
whatever small amount of Torah you were able to in your present condition.
However, this perspective could lead one to think that there is no reward for the actual
Torah studied (Heaven forbid). For let us imagine the following example of a man who
hired a contractor to build him a house, and the contractor built him only the frame of a
house. If there would be no other contractor available to complete the work according to
the needs of the owner, he would not be required to pay any compensation to the
contractor, for he received nothing of value. (A partially built house, with no way of
completing it, is worthless, at best.) On this basis, one might think that there was no
reward for the study of only part of the Torah, since the task which G-d had "contracted
for," that of "studying the [entire] Torah," wasn't completed. In response to this
possibility, the Tanna taught "It is not incumbent upon you to complete the task." The
Torah was given for man to struggle and toil over it. But it is not within man's capabilities
to complete the entire Torah, due to the infinite nature of the Torah and the finite nature
of man. (This was explained in the previous Mishna.) "It is not incumbent upon you to
complete the task" is presenting an insight into the nature of both Torah and of man.
The reward that G-d gives could be viewed like payment made by the property owner to
the contractor who is constructing a building for him. Payment is always due at the end
of the work, as we are taught (Bava Metzia 65a, Kiddushin 48b) "Rent/payment is due
only at the end [of the rental/contract period]." So only when the person has completed
the job is he entitled to payment. This is reasoning of the opinion that states (T.B.
Kiddushin 39b) "Payment for Mitzvoth does not exist in this world." Since the job of
doing Mitzvoth continues as long as a person is alive in this world, payment is not due
to him until he reaches the next world.
Since an employer doesn't owe payment until the task is complete, and the Torah is
infinite, with no possible completion, it appears that there should be no reward due for
studying greater quantities of Torah. (There is never a completion of the task, so no
payment can ever be due!)
However, every element of Torah learned is, in fact, an end in and of itself. Whatever
was learned is considered a complete task. Before he studied it, the person did not
know this part of the Torah. Now he does. That itself is a complete objective, and for
accomplishing this task reward is due to the person. But it can't be for the actual
quantity of Torah that was studied, since there is no quantity of Torah for which it can be
said that he has completed the task of studying or knowing "a lot of Torah.” As much
Torah as the person studies, there is so much more that he doesn't know.
Therefore, the Tanna teaches us that if you have learned "a great amount of Torah" you
are given a great amount of reward. As we said above, when man toils and struggles in
Torah, he receives reward for this, since he has successfully completed the task he is
assigned. One who is hired to plant seeds is paid for the time he spends planting and
the number of seeds he planted, (rather than for the crops that were produced) since he
has successfully completed the task he was given. The task of man is to study the
Torah, not to complete it. For the study he is given reward, and the more he studies it,
the more reward he receives.
There appears to be a difficulty in the language used in the Mishna. (As usual,
understanding why the unexpected word was used will help us gain a deeper and more
precise understanding of the intention of the Tanna. This is a fundamental method of
the Maharal’s analysis of Rabbinic texts.) The Mishna states "you are GIVEN a great
amount of reward." Why did didn’t it say "you are PAID a great amount of wages?" In
fact, when dealing with PAYMENT, it is always the amount the person has EARNED
and is due to him. So it is not accurate to say you are PAID A LOT. You are PAID
exactly what you earned. If the Tanna wants to emphasize the great quantity of reward
the person will receive, it is appropriate to use the verb "GIVEN," since the person is
being paid for his effort, which is more than payment for the results that were
accomplished.
Another question that needs to be considered is why the person doesn’t receive his
payment immediately. The Torah mandates that a worker be paid immediately upon
completion of his task. There is an explicit prohibition "Do not delay the payment of
wages overnight" (Vayikra 19:13) as well as a positive command "On the day [it is due]
you must pay his wages" (Devarim 24:15). The Torah makes no distinction between a
poor person (who needs the wages for daily survival) and a rich person (who may have
no immediate need for the money). The law about timely payment of wages differs from
other timely financial commitments that a person makes which he does not fulfill. If a
person promised to make a payment for a purchase or a loan, and he delayed the
payment, he does not violate a specific Torah prohibition (although he is considered an
"unreliable person," which is viewed very negatively see Bava Metziah 49). The
difference between paying wages and paying other financial commitments lies in the
nature of a worker and his striving. A person who works is considered as being in a
state of motion, moving towards a goal which he longs to attain, when he will ultimately
reach a state of rest and completion. Wages and payment is the ultimate conclusion,
which the person attains at the completion of the endeavor and struggle. It was for the
completion of the task and its reward that he struggled so hard. One who does not
provide this payment deprives the worker of the proper completion of the task and state
of rest that he seeks, and for this reason the Torah imposes an explicit prohibition. This
is very different from someone who buys a house (or any other material object) and
doesn’t pay for it immediately. Since the money is not payment for work and effort, no
prohibition is violated if the payment is delayed.
This distinction is creates the basis for the statement of the Tanna "Your Employer is
reliable to pay you the wages of your labor." Even though there is no immediate
payment for your efforts, your Employer can be relied upon to pay your wages in the
World to Come. And you should not be troubled by the fact that your wages aren’t being
paid immediately (as is normally required). For your wages can be compared to a
worker whose compensation is set as being a certain amount of the grain that will be
harvested at the end of the season. The employer only pays the wages when the new
grain has come into existence. (Until that time he is not required to pay anything.)
The work of a person in this world is of a similar nature. There are tasks for which the
wages are due immediately, and there are other tasks where the wages don’t yet exist.
A person might leave this world without having received the reward due to him (since
that reward doesn’t really exist in this world). And he might even leave the world having
received NO reward. It is for this possibility that the Tanna teaches us "the payment of
reward to righteous people is done in the World to Come." The main reward is, in fact,
only in the eternal Next World, and not in this world. So a person’s work is actually
being done for wages that are only available and due in the next world. It is for this
reason that one should not be surprised when wicked people do not receive punishment
in this world for their sins, nor do righteous people receive immediate reward. Real
payment is only available in the World to Come, and it can only be given at that time.