Laws of Torah Study, Chapter 5 (Auto Translated)

Rambam Hilchos Talmud Torah Chapter 5 – Honor of One’s Teacher

Introduction to Chapter 5

Good, we are learning Rambam Hilchos Talmud Torah Chapter 5.

We have already learned about the essential law of Talmud Torah, the obligation to teach children, after that we learned a bit about the laws of teaching students. Yesterday we learned how a rebbe teaches students, how the meturgeman (translator) transmits the Torah from the rebbe, and so forth, a bit about the laws of what one may do in the beis hamedrash (study hall).

Here we continue, this chapter speaks primarily about kavod rabo (honor of one’s teacher).

The Structure of Hilchos Talmud Torah: Two Mitzvos

It is seemingly… one must see internally whether he brings the halacha here or only in the next chapter.

Seemingly, we learned in the introduction at the beginning that there are in Hilchos Talmud Torah two mitzvos, yes?

There is the mitzvah of Talmud Torah and the mitzvah of “to honor his teachers and those who teach him.”

Yes.

So basically Chapter 5 is “to honor his teachers” – it doesn’t mean his teachers, but rather the one who teaches you, that’s one level of obligation.

Ah, this chapter is about his teachers, I mean the next chapter is about those who teach him, because the next chapter is about honor of a talmid chacham (Torah scholar).

But regarding his teachers I mean, you’ll read here how I interpret it, it means here an honor that a person must have for his rebbe, a certain level of honor. After that there is another level of honor that must be for every talmid chacham, that is in the next chapter.

The Difference Between Honor of One’s Teacher and Honor of a Talmid Chacham

Ah, it’s interesting, because in Sefer HaMitzvos we already had several times the matter of honoring another type regarding what we speak about honor of talmidei chachamim (Torah scholars).

There is the matter of honor of a talmid chacham because he is the one who teaches the straight path, that you should cleave – not honor, but rather cleave to talmidei chachamim to learn from them.

After that there is the thing that a person is influenced by his environment, therefore he should associate with talmidei chachamim.

Here we learn another thing: that in order to acquire Torah, a part of the mitzvah of Talmud Torah is that one should look up to a talmid chacham, only this way does one become a talmid chacham.

Okay, but now we’re speaking of your rebbe specifically.

Your rebbe has a special obligation.

A talmid chacham who is your rebbe, yes.

It turns out that if the rebbe is not a talmid chacham, that’s a second problem, why one may not have him. If he is more of a talmid chacham than you, he can already be your rebbe.

But now we’re speaking of rebbe muvhak (primary teacher), we’ll see, there are two levels of rebbe.

But now one can speak of the topic of the rebbe, of your rebbe, whom one must honor.

Halacha 1: Honor of One’s Teacher More Than One’s Father

Let’s begin. The Rambam says:

Just as a person is commanded regarding honor of his father and fear of him, as everyone knows, there is indeed a mitzvah of kibud av (honoring father), “ish imo v’aviv tira’u” (each man shall fear his mother and father), one must, one is commanded regarding honor and fear of the father. This mitzvah we haven’t yet learned. It’s interesting, it hasn’t yet been in the count of mitzvos. I mean Hilchos Kibud Av appears only at the end of the Rambam, Hilchos Mamrim (Laws of Rebels).

So is he obligated in honor of his teacher and fear of him. The same way he is obligated in the honor of his teacher and in the fear, in the awe of his teacher.

And not only that, not only is it like the father, but in a way even more, and his teacher more than his father. The obligation to honor a rebbe is even more than honoring the father.

He will already see regarding which halachos it is relevant, and why? For his father brought him to life in this world, one must honor a father because the father gave you life, because the father made you exist in this world. But his teacher who taught him wisdom brought him to life in the World to Come. The rebbe who taught you wisdom, is what brings you to life in the World to Come, he makes you have wisdom, and only wisdom remains in the World to Come, yes? The body dies. What remains in the World to Come? The knowledge that one acquires. Yes, this is already the same Rambam.

The Definition of Honor of One’s Teacher: Similar to Honoring Father, Not Like Honor of Tzaddikim

Yes. It’s interesting, he also says here that the definition is similar to honoring father. It’s not like what we learned earlier that one must honor tzaddikim (righteous people), chasidim (pious people), because they are similar to the Shechinah (Divine Presence), but rather because they are your rebbe. Just as the father, not because he is a father, but because he is your father. Here we speak of your rebbe, it’s a very personal connection, because he brought you to life in the World to Come.

Besides the fact that one must honor him because he is an important Jew in Klal Yisrael (the Jewish people), he is important to you. It goes backwards. First one must honor your rebbe, then the Rambam will say that not only your rebbe, but other people’s rebbes one must also. A different type.

This is the greatest respect that you say, it’s like kibud av, and it’s about the kal vachomer (logical inference). I mean, there will perhaps be other sources, we’ll see that the Rambam also brings a verse. But there must also be a kal vachomer, why must one honor a father? Because he gave you life. A rebbe also gives you life! What kind of life? Not that kind of life, life of the body, but rather life of the soul, life of knowledge.

Laws of Priority: Teacher Takes Precedence Over Father

Very well. The Rambam says, And how is the halacha? If he sees a lost object of his father and a lost object of his teacher, he sees a lost object, and there is the lost object of his father and the lost object of his teacher. Now the question, whom should he give priority? Whom should he first save? Whose money? Returning his teacher’s lost object takes precedence over that of his father, he is first commanded to deal with the lost object of his teacher before the lost object of his father. For the same reason that we learned, because the rebbe is the one who brings him to life in the World to Come.

Another case, his father and his teacher are carrying a burden, his father and his teacher are carrying a package. There is a mitzvah of unloading, of helping. Who comes first? He unloads his teacher’s and afterwards his father’s, he should help first the rebbe to take down the package, and afterwards the father.

His father and his teacher were captured, there is a mitzvah of pidyon shevuyim (redeeming captives). The question is, who comes first? There is a law of priority. Also here, he redeems his teacher, first one redeems the rebbe, and afterwards he redeems his father.

When the Father is a Talmid Chacham

The Rambam says, this is all when his father was not at all his teacher. But if his father was a talmid chacham, if the father is a talmid chacham – he doesn’t say that he must be his teacher, in general, if the father is a talmid chacham.

But seemingly the reason is because the father also brought him to life in the World to Come. It’s a good question, I don’t know. But the Rambam doesn’t say “if his father was his teacher,” the Gemara indeed says “his father his teacher,” but here he means, the Rambam says it that even if he’s not his teacher, even if he’s just a talmid chacham. But I say that the kal shekol (all the more so)… let’s go with the… one can learn that the reason is because the father is a talmid chacham, therefore more honor comes to him. But simply, more than logic, one can say that when the father also brought him to life in the World to Come, then he redeems his father first.

Question: A Father Who Taught Basics

And one must think about this, that even a father who is not a talmid chacham, but if the father taught him the basics, as the halacha, the Torah commanded, and the father taught him such a thing, the father gave him both. Even if the rebbe brought him more, the rebbe gave him more, but the father gave him both. One must think, it’s a good question, because if the father fulfilled the mitzvah of chinuch (education), and the father taught him exactly lulav, and the father taught him basic learning, he also brought him to life in the World to Come. It’s a question on the kal vachomer.

Exactly lulav is perhaps only a mitzvah, not Torah. Not that is what brings to life in the World to Come. But what you say, you’re speaking presumably with a bit of an edge.

Perhaps indeed that, perhaps because of that indeed that is the explanation. For that it says if he is a talmid chacham, that means, a father who is a talmid chacham, even if he’s not your rebbe, he taught you just like that, he’s a bit of a rebbe, he certainly taught you various things. One who speaks with you about what one speaks about, is a father who can’t do anything at all, he didn’t teach you anything at all. But it’s indeed a problem here.

When the Father is a Chacham

So if the father taught you, redemption of his father first. So seemingly the same thing should be regarding action and work, or in wisdom, if he is a talmid chacham. Then, ah, talmid chacham is clear that he’s not a rebbe, because he’s only a student, and a student is not at all a rebbe, one must be a chacham (wise person) to be a rebbe. And if he is indeed a chacham, fine he teaches you.

If he is already equal to his teacher, if the father is a chacham, even if he’s not as much a chacham as the rebbe, he still comes first regarding work, because the work of his father and afterwards the work of his teacher. Also the same regarding action also.

Discussion: The Distinction Between “Talmid Chacham” and “Chacham”

No, seemingly all these things are the same. I don’t see that this should be the distinction. It doesn’t seem that the distinction is this, that this is a talmid chacham or he is a chacham. Talmid chacham is fine, I don’t know, something doesn’t sit right with me here at all about the distinction. Why should he say in one place talmid chacham and in one place chacham?

Certainly, but what’s the point? Why… if he makes a kal vachomer, if even a talmid chacham the law is so, then kal vachomer if he is indeed a chacham. So something is missing for me. I don’t understand the two halachos. Do you understand what I’m saying here?

Perhaps he must indeed have pidyon shevuyim, not regarding work? I don’t know, not clear.

Comparison with Hilchos Gezeilah Va’Aveidah

He brings that in Hilchos Gezeilah Va’Aveidah (Laws of Theft and Lost Objects) the Rambam says the halacha, and he says it a bit differently. He says that if his rebbe is the rebbe muvhak, the father comes first. But if the rebbe is not a rebbe muvhak, and the father is himself a chacham, comes… it says that if the rebbe is a rebbe muvhak, the simple meaning is that he learned all Torah from that rebbe, not from the father. But if the rebbe is not a rebbe muvhak, and the father is also a talmid chacham, and he also learned from the rebbe, then the lost object of his father comes first.

Fear of Your Teacher Like Fear of Heaven

The Rambam continues, and there is no honor greater than honor of the teacher, and no fear greater than fear of the teacher. No one must one honor more, the greatest honor that a person must give must be given to the rebbe. And of whom must one have the most fear, is the fear of the teacher. As the Sages say, fear of your teacher like fear of Heaven.

Regarding fear of the rebbe the Rambam interprets, it doesn’t mean, it can’t be like fear of Heaven, because the fear of the Almighty is indeed a different level entirely. Rather it means that it is the highest, like fear of Heaven, higher than all on earth. Yes, that’s how he interprets it, no? That’s the greatest honor.

Question: What About a King?

What about a king or something else? I mean, what is then? A king there is no mitzvah to have fear. A king one presumably has fear, because nature says so. Of a non-Jew one also has fear. I remember that the Rambam does indeed have some language, in Hilchos Mamrim, in Hilchos Deos, about a nasi (prince), like that. That the king is the greatest, has even more than the beis din, or some such language.

Practical Question: Honor of the Admor vs. Honor of the Maggid Shiur

Yes, I actually think, that the people who live nowadays where there is a rebbe, such an Admor shlita, whom one honors much more than the rebbe who taught him Torah, yes. It’s a big question, because there is indeed a law that fear of your teacher is like fear of Heaven. Or do you respect more the rebbe who is just because he is the king? You can say that he has a law of king, he has many laws, but your rebbe he is not.

It could be that you can say there like that the maggidei shiurim (lecturers) are all both students of the great rebbe. Like you think of a rosh yeshiva (head of yeshiva), there are maggidei shiurim. Yes, the maggid shiur is perhaps more, you learned with him more, but the rosh yeshiva gives the talks and he is the… it’s the same question. Because that one is also a chacham, respect comes to him, but not the same respect for a rebbe. The respect that you must have for a rebbe, that means literally, the one who taught you Torah, not the one who it says in the halacha.

Story of Rabbi Menachem Zemba

As I heard about Rabbi Menachem Zemba, I don’t know if it’s true, he said that in Ger a Jew knew Rabbi Menachem Zemba, and he said, “Mendel lifts up the bench.” He is a prince of Torah, but that’s how it is, that everyone is nullified before the rebbe. But indeed in halacha one must know how it works. It’s not sustained.

Honor of a Talmid Chacham: A Practical Point

Just so, I always have something that I think, that when people want to fulfill the mitzvah of honor of talmidei chachamim and the like, one seeks a great famous person and one struggles to get in. Every such person certainly had a young man who learned with him in yeshiva, who is certainly his age, who is already today a talmid chacham, and he’s desperate for a dollar, he’s desperate for someone to look at him. It’s much greater to fulfill the mitzvah of honor of a talmid chacham when you follow up with him than when you go to the famous ones. But that’s the next chapter. Now we’re still speaking of your rebbe. Your rebbe is indeed gratitude.

It’s more like a personal thing.

Story of the Kotzker Rebbe

There is a story, the Kotzker Rebbe went to visit his old town where he grew up, perhaps in Kotzk or in Tomashov, and he went to visit a rebbe who taught him, his teacher of alef-beis, of Chumash. He said, the rebbe of Gemara, he said many false explanations, but the rebbe of alef-beis is a real rebbe, certainly according to all opinions a real rebbe, and one must have more respect for him. But what happened

Rambam Hilchos Talmud Torah Chapter 5 – Honor of One’s Teacher (Continued)

Halacha 1 (Continued) – “Therefore they said… his honor is like the Shechinah”

But indeed in halacha one must know how it works. I didn’t sustain it.

Digression: Honor of Talmidei Chachamim – The Great and the Small

Just so, I always have something that I think, that when people want to fulfill the mitzvah of honor of talmidei chachamim and the like, one seeks a great famous person and one struggles to get in. Every such person certainly had a young man who learned with him in yeshiva who is approximately his age, who is already today a talmid chacham, and he’s desperate for a dollar, he’s desperate for someone to look at him. It’s much greater to fulfill the mitzvah of honor of a talmid chacham when you still follow up with him than when you go to the famous ones. But that’s an external paragraph.

The Rebbe Who Teaches Personal Things

Now we’re still speaking of your rebbe, your rebbe is divided in essence, he means more like personal things. There is a story, the Kotzker Rebbe went to visit his old town, where he grew up, perhaps in Kotzk or in Tomashov, and he went to visit his rebbe who taught him, his teacher of alef-beis and Chumash. The rebbe of Gemara, he said, the rebbe said many false explanations, he’s not… but the rebbe of alef-beis is a real rebbe, certainly according to all opinions a real rebbe, one must have more respect for him.

But that’s what I thought, that the father is the one who teaches the Modeh Ani with the basic basics, one must know.

Precision: The Rebbe Who Teaches Wisdom

Something is not clear here, the precision one says like this, you say indeed that in other places he sees it differently. No, that can, according to the Rambam himself it won’t be a question, because life in the World to Come means literally the knowledge, the rebbe who taught him wisdom, not the rebbe who taught him how one makes a blessing and how one says Hebrew. That’s certain, because he speaks the whole time about wisdom. He speaks indeed about wisdom of Torah which is more than mitzvos. I’m speaking about this, about the matter, however you want to call it. Okay.

The Words of the Rambam

He continues, therefore they said, for this is what Chazal (our Sages) say. So. The “therefore” he means to say about this matter of the great honor of the teacher. Yes? Yes.

His honor is like the Shechina (Divine Presence)

His honor is like the Shechina. It’s inclusive, “One who disputes his rabbi is like one who disputes the Shechina.” It’s one thing, someone who argues with his rabbi, he is disputing the Shechina. Yes. Yes. It’s as if he’s arguing with the Shechina. Yes.

“And anyone who makes a quarrel with his rabbi”, like someone makes a fight, he doesn’t fight with him directly. Cholek (disputes) perhaps means he goes to set himself up separately… There is in halacha, the Rema brings this, cholek al rabo (disputes his rabbi), oseh meriva (makes a quarrel) I don’t know, but cholek the Rema says that he makes his own party, he makes his own shiur (class).

What is meriva? I thought, cholek means he makes a rebellion, he fights against him. Oseh meriva means like under the table, he turns something against his rabbi, “like one who makes a quarrel with the Shechina.”

The verses that the Rambam brings

“As it says ‘when they contended against Hashem’”, when the Jews had complaints against Moshe Rabbeinu, they contended against Moshe Rabbeinu, it says “when they contended against Hashem,” they make strife and quarrel against the Almighty.

And the same thing “that the children of Israel contended with Hashem”.

And also further, “and in all the evil deeds that they quarrel with the Shechina, as it says ‘your complaints are not against us’”. Moshe Rabbeinu answers, by Korach I think? Or by the incident of the quail? I mean the incident of the quail, yes. “Your complaints are not against us”. Yes, it’s by the quail, very good. “But against Hashem”. “Hashem heard,” yes yes.

“Anyone who grumbles after his rabbi is as if he grumbles after the Shechina, as it says ‘and the people spoke against God and against Moshe’”. When there the Jews were grumbling against Moshe Rabbeinu, it was viewed as if they were grumbling against the Almighty Himself.

Precision: one thing or two things?

They pose, “as if they are like Moshe.” Apparently one could say they did two things, but from the juxtaposition of the verse we see that they meant one thing, his rabbi and the Shechina.

Explanation: Why is the rabbi like the Shechina?

The simple meaning is straightforward. By Moshe Rabbeinu one understands, Moshe Rabbeinu had a direct connection with the Almighty, he did everything according to Hashem’s word, therefore when one has complaints against him, one is disputing the Shechina. But to apply this also to your rabbi is already a bit of a next level. Here we’re talking about such a type of rabbi that people think that everything he does is according to Hashem’s word. Apparently this is by Moshe, no, not necessarily.

In a certain sense, every rabbi is… What’s the meaning? People, I didn’t get from Pesach, I already know, Pesach Torah scrolls, that a rabbi has a Pesach rabbi’s a Shechina. It’s very simple. Who represents to you the wisdom, the knowledge, the Torah? The rabbi. If you are arguing with the one who brought down to you the wisdom.

No, I say, but by all these verses the simple meaning is that they apparently complained against Moshe Rabbeinu, who did everything literally directly according to Hashem’s word. But a rabbi is also one who acts according to Hashem’s word. Not everything he does, but the wisdom that he teaches is the Almighty’s Torah, the same Torah.

Discussion: Disputing one’s rabbi in learning or in other matters?

Don’t we always say this, that you think that we say that a student of a rabbi must be like he isn’t? We’re still talking about how he does the learning, how he goes against his rabbi’s learning. We’re not talking here when it concerns who knows what, he’s fighting over a building. Ah, then that one is a servant, because the person who represents this must be respected in such a way.

What is this cholek al rabo? What does cholek al rabo mean? What he said that it is cholek al haShechina (disputing the Shechina).

Halacha 2 – “Cholek al rabo” = Making one’s own yeshiva

The words of the Rambam

He says, the Rambam, “This is one who established for himself a study hall”, he makes himself his own beit midrash, his own place for learning, “and sits and expounds and teaches”, he makes his own shiur, “and sits and expounds and teaches,” he sits down and he expounds and he teaches, “not during his rabbi’s time and his rabbi is alive, even if his rabbi is in an overseas country”. Even in another country, as long as the rabbi lives, and if you make yourself independent, become a rabbi during his lifetime, become a rabbi during the lifetime of your rabbi without permission, this is called cholek al rabo.

Explanation: The language “cholek” – dividing, not arguing

It’s very interesting, “cholek” in the language of the Sages always means from the language of… I saw that machlokes (dispute) is translated in a… from the language of “faction”… like to be cholek, “yachloку,” to divide something in half. Or to divide, yes, not from the language of arguing, not from the language of someone going away. He doesn’t make a machlokes by going away. He divides the community, he divides the shiur in half. Or he makes himself a separate division, something like that, he separates himself, he makes his own, he doesn’t run away from the other one, even if he doesn’t make any noise, he has his own chassidim, this is also cholek al rabo. He should have gone to his rabbi, I know.

“And it is forbidden for a person to rule in the presence of his rabbi forever”

Ah, good, “and it is forbidden for a person to rule in the presence of his rabbi forever”, and further. So this, cholek al rabo means that he makes himself his own yeshiva, even if the rabbi isn’t here, he’s in another place, but he declared himself a rabbi during his rabbi’s lifetime.

After this there is a worse thing, this is to rule in the presence of his rabbi. “And it is forbidden for a person to rule in the presence of his rabbi”, this is when he doesn’t go away. In the rabbi’s beit midrash he decides questions. “And it is forbidden for a person to rule in the presence of his rabbi forever,” and one may not be a moreh (teacher/decisor). “In the presence of his rabbi” apparently doesn’t mean when in his face, but when in the rabbi’s place. I’ll say how soon.

“Anyone who rules halacha in the presence of his rabbi is liable to death”. One who rules halacha in the presence of his rabbi is liable to death. What death? What is this liable to death from where? Yes, this is one of those liable to death that we don’t execute. It doesn’t mean that he is liable to death, it doesn’t mean that we execute him. It actually says that Shmuel… about Shmuel and about other people, but liable to death means that it’s very sharp, it’s very strict. That’s the simple meaning. It doesn’t mean that we should God forbid… because he is worthy of death, worthy of death is liable to death.

It could be, because there can only be one rabbi at a time, and we’re not now going to execute the rabbi because you disputed.

Halacha 2 (continued) – The measure of twelve mil

What does “in the presence of his rabbi” mean?

What does in the presence of his rabbi mean? Ah, there is a way, we must also have local halachic decisors. So what is the boundary, until where may one yes? From how far away?

He says like this, “If there is between him and his rabbi twelve mil”, if it’s far enough, twelve mil, twelve mil is a measure of techum derabbanan (rabbinic boundary), yes. Fine, it’s far enough, that it’s clear that the reason why he answers is not because he considers himself better, but simply a service, because the person has a question and he can’t come to the rabbi, fine it’s permitted to answer.

Discussion: “A matter of halacha” specifically?

It could be one asks a matter of halacha specifically, because this is a concern, but for example someone asks him a way from here to learn, it’s expected to come to the rabbi. It could be, a matter of halacha is something that the person needs to know now. Yes, but it could also be the opposite, that just saying Torah with permission, doesn’t mean only… the rabbi is the authority, you tell him a halacha, you tell him just a vort (Torah thought) in our parlance, and that’s not what we’re talking about. Except in certain places where this is the whole authority, I don’t know. But… yes… right? Yes.

And the rabbi isn’t here, it’s twelve mil, one can’t even travel. Twelve mil, that one can travel, should we say “go travel to the rabbi.” But further than that. Yes.

Distinction between “ruling” and “knowledge”

In Shulchan Aruch and the commentaries they add that we’re talking in a manner when a decision is needed here. If an am ha’aretz (ignoramus) simply doesn’t know what it says, anyone may tell him, “such and such is written in Shulchan Aruch.” This is just a matter of knowledge. Ruling means when one needs someone who should use his mind, his judgment, this means deciding in the presence of his rabbi. Saying what it says one may.

Halacha 2 (continued) – To separate from prohibition even in the presence of his rabbi

The words of the Rambam

195. Ah, further, but even in the presence of his rabbi it is permitted to rule. If one sees someone transgressing a prohibition, one wants to separate him from a prohibition, then one may even in the presence of his rabbi.

Someone says like this, “When a person does a prohibited act”, when a Jew does a prohibited act, a person does a prohibited act, because he doesn’t know, “or because of wickedness”, or because he’s wicked and he does it intentionally, “one must separate him”, one must do the mitzvah of rebuke, to separate him, or the mitzvah of lifnei iver (before the blind), one must tell him this is forbidden. “Even in the presence of his rabbi”, even in the presence of his rabbi, “even though they don’t give him permission”, even if the rabbi didn’t give him permission.

Why? Because this is a desecration of Hashem’s name when a person does a sin publicly, it’s not good that we speak publicly. Oy, desecration of Hashem’s name, “in any place where there is desecration of Hashem’s name”, he doesn’t mean, he doesn’t take his own Torah, he takes this. “In any place where there is desecration of Hashem’s name, we don’t accord honor to the rabbi”, then it’s not the time to give honor to the rabbi. That is, the Almighty is more important than the rabbi. The rabbi’s honor is very holy, but when a Jew does a sin, this is a matter of honor of Hashem’s name, not a matter of honor of the rabbi.

Explanation: Perhaps this isn’t a flaw in the rabbi at all

And in general, here one could say that it’s not a flaw in the rabbi at all, not because we don’t accord honor to the rabbi, but in general it doesn’t mean any flaw in the rabbi, because you’re not here to decide, you’re here simply to remove a sin. He means to say in a manner even in a manner let’s say that it could indeed bother the rabbi, it means as if you made a decision in his presence, but there is the matter of a place of desecration of Hashem’s name.

Discussion: A proof against the distinction between “ruling” and “knowledge”

Perhaps from here is a proof that your distinction that you repeated isn’t so correct, because it appears that here regarding the separation from halacha isn’t a ruling, it appears from a halacha that he simply doesn’t know, because he says clearly he doesn’t know, or because of wickedness. He doesn’t say because a decision is needed, one can decide differently. No, he asks on Shabbos, and he does things that this goes into the category of a certain Shabbos prohibition, and one must actually ask the rabbi, will give him the right not to. Because according to you this is a matter of desecration of Hashem’s name, it’s said that one must go with your ruling. Why should that one go with your ruling at all? He says, “Aha, you say so, I say differently.”

Answer: This is a different type of thing than deciding

This could be this is a different type of thing than deciding. Deciding is one thing, but this is a matter of ownership of authority. In the rabbi’s shul to stand up and give a sermon, “stop doing what you’re holding in the middle of doing.” This isn’t, this is much more a cholek al rabo, not exactly a cholek, but it’s more a matter of disrespect than deciding. Therefore, here is even where there doesn’t need to be any judgment, it’s the leadership. To protest where that one is leadership, the rabbi can tolerate him. It’s not your job. The rabbi didn’t see it in the beit midrash. Not your job to protest in the beit midrash. Not to protest God forbid to permit a second type of prohibition. To protest such a displayed thing.

All these things we’re apparently talking about when the rabbi is clearly his rabbi, his primary rabbi. Because the Shulchan Aruch makes distinctions between a primary rabbi and a rabbi who is a bit of a colleague, someone who is more elevated than him, but they are the same level. This law is from rabbi, it’s not clear that it applies in our times, because there isn’t such a thing as rabbi, but this we will see.

He says further, “we’re speaking about teachers.” This is if it’s a matter of desecration of Hashem’s name, stop that someone is doing a sin, one may yes say, “in a matter that became publicized.” But in general, both permissions, both the one that is twelve mil, all these things, all these solutions, is when it’s made an incident, but “to establish oneself for ruling and to sit and expound to every questioner”, is tremendous, even “at the end of the world and his rabbi at the end of the world, it is forbidden for him to rule until his rabbi dies”, even if it’s very far. On a permanent basis, I become, I make myself my own company, I’m already great, I can already on my own, this one may not do. One may not “until his rabbi dies, unless he took permission from his rabbi”. Only if one received permission from his rabbi, then he may, but without permission one cannot at all.

Innovation: Even after his rabbi dies – not everyone may become a rabbi

He says further, what if the rabbi did die? Yes, do you think that now it becomes a lawless world, and everyone may become a rabbi? He says, “Not everyone whose rabbi died” he is already at the level, he can already learn enough. He doesn’t say what the measure is, but yes.

But look, here comes a whole… here comes very simply, one must already almost come to translate. Here comes a very sharp… a whole piece of a story.

Halachot 7-9 – A student who hasn’t reached the level of ruling and rules / A sage who has reached the level of ruling and doesn’t rule

Rambam: A student who hasn’t reached the level of ruling – a fool, wicked, and arrogant

Yes, so the Rambam, “And any student who hasn’t reached the level of ruling and rules”, a student who hasn’t reached the level, and he’s still not worthy to be a teacher of halacha, and he does decide, “behold he is a fool, wicked, and arrogant”.

He has three levels, he is a fool, wicked, and arrogant. It could be that it’s one of the three. Or he decides thus because he’s a fool, he doesn’t know that he hasn’t yet reached the level of ruling. Or he knows that he hasn’t reached the level of ruling, and he’s wicked because he does it anyway. Or he’s arrogant, he hasn’t reached the level of ruling, but he convinces himself that he has reached the level of ruling, because he’s a great baal gaavah (arrogant person). I mean all three together. No, but it could be, it’s a whole good explanation. Because there are three things, a fool means because he doesn’t know what it means to have reached the level of ruling, he convinces himself. Or he convinces himself because he’s arrogant, or he does know and he’s wicked.

Oy. Umm…

“For she has cast down many wounded” – the verse about a promiscuous woman

“And about him it is said ‘for she has cast down many wounded’”, but such a one who… who… who causes other Jews to stumble with incorrect halachot, casts down wounded, he causes other Jews to stumble, like… it’s a language he causes other Jews to stumble with sins, apparently. And he’s going to say now the other half of the verse. But the verse speaks of… the simple meaning speaks of what? Of a promiscuous woman, of a married woman who is promiscuous, it’s interesting. But here it’s very good, because wisdom is called your true wife, and the promiscuous woman is always the false wisdom. It’s a person who sells false wisdom, like the promiscuous woman.

And “she has cast down many wounded”, he makes people. I think, if he is lenient, one understands that he casts down many wounded, because… because he gives out leniencies that aren’t sustained, he makes Jews with prohibitions. But if he is only stringent… let’s say, he becomes a judge, this is… I mean, if a Torah scholar who hasn’t reached the level of ruling, usually he’ll be stringent, because that’s easier. But he still casts down wounded, because the person, first of all he’ll get a hatred for Torah, and he’ll stop asking halachic rulings, because he always comes stringent, yes? They are “she has cast down many wounded”.

Okay. And it could be another reason he “casts down many wounded”, because he is liable to death we learned earlier. So he is I himself, he is a suicide. Okay.

“And numerous are all her slain” – A sage who has reached the level of ruling and doesn’t rule

Rambam Hilchos Talmud Torah Chapter 5 – Honor of the Teacher (Continued)

But I need to learn the other half. “Bechayei chacham shagah l’hora’ah”. Ah, now a person thinks, you know what, I’m never going to pasken, I won’t get myself into these troubles, but it doesn’t help. You’re caught. Either way. “Chacham shagah l’hora’ah”, if you’re a humble person who doesn’t come to give hora’ah, you’re doing a terrible wrong. “Harei zeh monei Torah”, preventing Torah, preventing Torah from Jews, “nosein michsholos lifnei ha’ivrim”. He is also, because the people won’t have anyone to ask, so the second one who doesn’t either. He’s placing stumbling blocks before the blind, the language of the Rambam is thinking here presumably from “v’lifnei iveir lo sitein michshol”, because those who could help people should know what they need to do.

And on whom does the second part of the verse stand, “va’atzumim kol harugeiha”? Who is meant by the “rabim chalalim hipilah”? The student who hasn’t reached the level of hora’ah. It’s not standing, what, we don’t mention any names here, what does it mean here someone.

“Talmidim Ketanim” – Hedyot Kofetz Barosh

“Eilu hatalmidim haketanim shelo higi’u l’Torah k’ra’ui”, the little rabbis who come up, and they don’t learn Torah as it should be. “V’harei hem lo lamdu klum”, they haven’t learned enough. They haven’t learned enough. They haven’t been meshamesh. Yesterday we learned that in order to become a talmid chacham one needs to learn very much. He didn’t do that. “Ela mipnei shemisgaim b’einei ha’am”, they are contentious people, they just want to become great. “V’koftzim v’yoshvim barosh”, they are a hedyot kofetz barosh, which appears a few times, yes. Hedyot kofetz barosh, very good, yes. “V’koftzim v’yoshvim barosh ladin ul’horos b’Yisrael”, to pasken.

“Hem Hamarbim Hamachloket” – Why They Create Dispute

“Hem hamarbim hamachloket”, they increase dispute. Why? Because it will bother the serious talmidei chachamim, there will be a dispute. No, not because of that. Because this is what the person does. He’s constantly seeking to have a shiur, to have someone who is finally heard, who doesn’t seek to aggrandize himself. If there’s already someone who knows, he doesn’t try to make another yeshiva so he can also have a yeshiva. But the person who is a hedyot kofetz barosh, he wants constantly, he needs to be the rabbi who will be honored, if there aren’t enough positions, he opens a new yeshiva, he makes a new beis medrash etc. etc. He increases dispute, they said, he just makes more factions.

“Mechablin Ner HaTorah” – Why This Extinguishes the Light of Torah

“V’hem machrivim es ha’olam, v’hem mechablin ner haTorah”. I mean mechablin ner haTorah he also said about a talmid chacham who makes his Torah a spade to dig with. “Me’or hadas” – it’s very beautiful, because Torah is beautiful and bright when all who represent Torah are respected, respected people, people who have a beauty, a brightness. But if Torah scholars conduct themselves, they steal and they take money from people and make disputes…

And the sad thing is that the one who does this is not a talmid chacham at all. He’s the liar who deserves death. People say, “Ah, the talmid chacham”. No, you’re not talking about a talmid chacham, you’re talking about the rebels. That’s why the Rambam writes it. Why does the Rambam write this whole sharp thing? What does he want from us? He wants to restore kavod haTorah.

I want to say about this, you have a complaint, you see that the talmidei chachamim are… I saw someone said, yes, he has pleasure that Chazal had a sense of humor, what does it say “talmidei chachamim marbim shalom ba’olam”. Meanwhile, where there are two talmidei chachamim, they fight. He says, no. Says the Rambam, no, he’s not a talmid chacham, he’s a talmid katan. He’s not a talmid chacham, he’s a talmid katan. What are all these things?

“Shu’alim Ketanim Mechablin Kramim” – Explanation of the Parable

“Va’aleihem amar Shlomo b’chochmaso… ah, they are mechablin kerem Hashem Tzevakos”. They are destroying, they damage the Almighty’s field. The Almighty’s field is like the field of the people of Torah. “Va’aleihem amar Shlomo b’chochmaso ‘echzu lanu shu’alim shu’alim ketanim’”. Little foxes. Foxes means such cunning fellows. “Mechablin kramim, uchramenu smadar” – when the fields have perhaps fruits that are already grown. But the smadar, the grapes that aren’t yet grown…

Perhaps one can say that the destroyers are the smadar, they haven’t yet become complete… “Mechablin kramim” – ah, they make it so one can’t eat good grapes. When it comes when a talmid chacham, he would serve good grapes, because he would give blessed fruits of peace. Yes, he would give, he would explain the halacha in depth. But now, they come, they pasken, and they throw as if there are only grapes that aren’t fit for eating. Yes, actually interesting. Okay. Yes.

Summary: The Rambam’s Purpose – Restoring Kavod HaTorah

He says, so until now we’ve learned, how much have we learned, about the great virtue of kavod rabo, and that one may not quarrel with him, and whoever does, becomes a rabbi himself. Actually interesting that it comes in here, this is the order. Whoever does, becomes a rabbi himself, but will you be fit for hora’ah, you won’t be fit for hora’ah. He says here, perhaps he’s also speaking here about kavod rabo, because the one who isn’t fit for hora’ah, he causes the world to be disrespectful of the talmidei chachamim, it will be a chilul Hashem.

He causes the amei ha’aretz to say, the halachos say the amei ha’aretz, more who is called yes… Everything that it says there what one needs to know, to be able to become a dayan, to be able to become a rav. Eh, the commentator says in Sanhedrin. Yes, but I don’t know if the Tosafos say the same thing. He needs to have from a rabbi yadon yadin, therefore it doesn’t mean, okay, therefore it’s a mitzvah. Ah, perhaps yes, there it says in Tosafos, he should be fit to sit in a beis din Sanhedrin, and such things.

Halacha 10 – A Student May Not Call His Teacher by Name

So the Rambam continues with the matters of kavod rabo. He says, it’s forbidden for a student to call his teacher by name, even not in his presence. You may not call by name. One must say, “my teacher and rabbi so-and-so”. One must say, not say, not say, with a title one can yes have a rabbi, rabbi, Rabbi Moshe? We don’t say it that way, because we learned that the translator says “Rabbeinu ploni”, but he doesn’t say, he says “avi mori” or “Rabbeinu ploni”. This is also how we conduct ourselves today, we say “Rabbeinu HaKadosh”, but the one who is truly our rabbi, we say “Rabbeinu HaKadosh”, and so on, we don’t say their names.

A student of Rabbi Moshe, he doesn’t say “Rabbi Moshe”? For example, a student may not say “Rabbi Moshe”? A student may not, so it says here. So it says here, I can’t interpret. Wait, “v’lo yikra shemo shel rabo bifanav”. I see, by the great Chassidim, for example, you know how you can see how accurate a rabbi must truly be? By the phony people who don’t truly have a rabbi, but they’ve taken some person and they make themselves that it’s their rabbi, they conduct themselves with all the halachos even with a smudge over. But you see, that the sharp Chassidim never say the rabbi’s name. They will never say “Rabbi ploni”. They will understand that it’s a great shame. I say “Rabbi Baruch is my rabbi”? No, “the Rebbe”.

Further says the…

What is not easy for them because they don’t have any disaster. Yes, one commanded and does. He says further, “v’lo yazkir shemo bifanav”. One may not mention his name in his presence.

Rambam Hilchos Talmud Torah Chapter 5 – Honor of the Teacher (Continued)

Halacha 10 – Not Mentioning His Name in His Presence

Rambam’s Words:

“V’lo yazkir shemo bifanav, va’afilu likro la’acherim sheshmam k’shem rabo, k’derech she’oseh b’shem aviv, ela yeshaneh shemam, va’afilu l’achar moso. Bameh devarim amurim? B’shem pla’i, shekol hashomei’a yodei’a shehu ploni.”

Explanation:

He says here that if the rabbi has a certain name, and there comes another who has the same name, Chaim Klein, whatever the rabbi’s name is, one may not say that person’s name, because it looks like one is saying the rabbi’s name. It’s a matter of maris ayin, it’s not respectful. Just like with a father one also may not say, if someone is called like the father, you may not call that person’s name, but you must change the name, call that person a bit differently.

Says the Rambam, “Bameh devarim amurim? B’shem pla’i, shekol hashomei’a yodei’a shehu ploni.” Because then they will think one means the rabbi, because one says the same name. But if the rabbi has a very general name, then there’s no prohibition.

Remark: “The Rebbe” – The Chassidic Conduct

By the phony people who don’t truly have a rabbi, but they’ve taken some person and he makes himself that he’s a rabbi, they conduct themselves with all the halachos even with a dirty one over, but you see that the sharp Chassidim never say the rabbi’s name. They will never say Rabbi ploni, they will understand that it’s a great shame to say Rabbi Baruch is my rabbi… No, the Rebbe.

—

Halacha 10 (Continued) – Greeting One’s Teacher

Rambam’s Words:

“V’lo yitein shalom l’rabo, o yachzir lo shalom, k’derech shenosnim hare’im u’machzirim zeh lazeh. Ela shocheh lefanav, umechabdo b’chavod, ‘shalom alecha rabbi’. V’im nasan lo rabo shalom, yachzir lo ‘shalom alecha rabbi u’mori’.”

Explanation:

When he gives greetings to the rabbi, he shouldn’t do it like one does with any friend, I don’t know, such a slap on the back, some such friendliness, but he should do it with fear and respect. “Ela shocheh lefanav, umechabdo b’chavod, ‘shalom alecha rabbi’. V’im nasan lo rabo shalom, yachzir lo ‘shalom alecha rabbi u’mori’.”

Why when returning must one say an extra word? Like one says “shalom aleichem”, and one answers “aleichem shalom”, one adds a word. “Shabbat shalom”, “Shabbat shalom u’mevorach”. I don’t know, that’s just courtesy I think. The point is, it shouldn’t return shalom aleichem and make a life. It adds another drop of respect, so I think. Yes.

—

Halacha 11 – Removing Tefillin, Reclining, Prayer Before One’s Teacher

Rambam’s Words:

“V’chein lo yachlatz tefillin bifnei rabo.”

Explanation:

He says further, “v’chein lo yachlatz tefillin bifnei rabo”, one shouldn’t remove tefillin in front of the rabbi. What is the matter of removing tefillin? Why is this not respectful? Yes, because in a respectful situation one goes with tefillin, if it’s like removing today a hat. Not exactly. Tefillin is a garment of fear and respect, one shouldn’t remove it in front of the rabbi. Very good.

—

Rambam’s Words:

“V’lo yaseiv, ela yosheiv k’omed lifnei hamelech.”

Explanation:

“V’lo yaseiv”, and one shouldn’t recline in front of the rabbi. “Ela yosheiv k’omed lifnei hamelech”, rather one sits as we learned earlier that once people would stand, but today one sits, but at least this sitting should be with derech eretz, not sitting very strongly reclined. One sees that this is a halacha even on Pesach, that sometimes the rabbi, he doesn’t need haseivah, because it’s not fitting to recline in front of the rabbi. Very good.

—

Rambam’s Words:

“V’lo yispaleil lifnei rabo, v’lo achar rabo… ela yisrachek l’acharav, lo yihyeh mechuvan keneged achorav.”

Explanation:

“V’lo yispaleil lifnei rabo”, one shouldn’t pray in front of the rabbi, “v’lo achar rabo”, and not behind the rabbi. How should one pray? A person prays with his rabbi, how should he pray? Not in front, not on the side, and not behind. “Ela yisrachek l’acharav”, he should distance himself a bit, one gives a bit of space to the rabbi. One shouldn’t be right next to him, not right in front, right behind. “Lo yihyeh mechuvan keneged achorav”, he shouldn’t be completely aligned behind him. This is also a matter of derech eretz, or it shouldn’t look like one is praying to the rabbi. It depends which side. Very good. Behind one shouldn’t be aligned kenegdo from behind. Not be behind the rabbi so it looks like one is praying to the rabbi. Not be in front of the rabbi because it’s not derech eretz. Not on the side because you’re equal with him. But where? Somewhere below, but not from below. Not right under him. That’s the explanation, so I think. Very good.

Therefore they used to place the rabbis on the top, yes, no one should be in front of them, and one should give enough space. But also not under them. Okay, one gives a bit of space. Ah, you mean directly below. Okay. There are Jews, yes.

—

Halacha 11 (Continued) – Bathhouse, Rabbi’s Place, Deciding His Words

Rambam’s Words:

“V’lo yikanes im rabo l’merchatz.”

Explanation:

He says further, “v’lo yikanes im rabo l’merchatz”, one may not enter with the rabbi into the bathhouse. This is also not respectful.

—

Rambam’s Words:

“V’lo yeisheiv bimkom rabo, v’lo yachri’a devarav bifanav.”

Explanation:

The halacha says further, “v’lo yeisheiv bimkom rabo”, one may not sit in the rabbi’s place, “v’lo yachri’a devarav bifanav”, and when the rabbi speaks, and for example the rabbi has a doubt, he shouldn’t decide the rabbi’s doubt. Yes, that’s what isn’t. Or even say that he’s right. Even he doesn’t have a doubt. He shouldn’t say “yes, the rabbi knows, the rabbi says well.” Not your job to say that the rabbi says well or not.

Discussion: May a Student Disagree with the Rabbi?

Aha. But l’heter, what he shouldn’t do, if he has a different reasoning than the rabbi, apparently there’s a way how he may say it. He shouldn’t say it in a manner… What? I see, he brings an answer from the Rema. He asked the Rema the question of the practical halacha. He says “yachri’a devarav” means because it’s a reasoning, but one can say differently, he shouldn’t say differently. He should rather take the rabbi’s reasoning, because the rabbi understands better. No, not necessarily because he understands better. It would be a law in Talmud Torah. I mean now also the student, but now it’s even from kavod rabo. It’s not derech eretz. When the rabbi says one can say this way, you say one can say differently. No, but if he has some objection to the rabbi, apparently he needs to find a refined way to say it. No, look not, look at the next piece. The “yachri’a” means my inclination. No, “yachri’a” means that his opinion leans, and my opinion leans differently, and now he means to explain his error. No, but I’m saying what may he yes, when he has a proof different from the rabbi’s approach. It doesn’t say here what he may. I don’t know how to tell you.

He says, he brings from the Gra in Shulchan Aruch, Hilchos Talmud Torah, kavod rabo, that one may not do it in his presence. If one argues with the rabbi, it shouldn’t be in his presence. One may argue with the rabbi, one may even decide. A person doesn’t have to pasken everything the rabbi said. He brings here the Rema himself brings his father’s approach and says, “I hold differently.” Because it’s not in his presence. It’s a matter of derech eretz. It’s not a matter of having faith in everything the rabbi says, but on practical halachos that we learned.

I’m saying that apparently one may even speak in front of the rabbi too, but it’s in a refined way. But what should the rabbi do with this and that Tosafos that implies differently? There’s a way of speaking with the rabbi in learning. Here it sounds like not. I don’t know how to tell you. It could be that here we’re talking about a different type of rabbi. We don’t have rabbis, because we and the rabbi learn from the book. But if there’s a true rabbi, we don’t grasp that it makes sense, because our rabbis aren’t the type of rabbis we’re going to see soon. If someone has a rabbi where the rabbi can tell him “I take it from Har Sinai”, like the Chasam Sofer who can pass it to me, he would be right. No, you’re obligated, but all this honor is more than we conduct ourselves even with our rabbis, except as he says, except for the person who is one with two houses. And part of this is because we don’t have true rabbis, but another part of this is, one doesn’t have true rabbis, therefore these halachos stand, so that one should respect the rabbis more.

—

Halacha 12 – Sitting, Standing, Leaving from One’s Teacher

Rambam’s Words:

“V’lo yeisheiv lefanav ad sheyomar lo sheiv. V’lo ya’amod lefanav ad sheyomar lo amod, o ad shetol reshus la’amod.”

Explanation:

Yes, further. “V’lo yeisheiv lefanav ad sheyomar lo sheiv”. He shouldn’t sit down in front of his rabbi until the rabbi tells him to sit. “V’lo ya’amod lefanav ad sheyomar lo amod, o ad shetol reshus la’amod”. And also not stand up, until the rabbi tells him to stand up, or he asks permission that he may stand up.

—

Rambam’s Words:

“Ksheniftar merabo, lo yachzir lo achorav ela panav keneged panav.”

Explanation:

Further, “ksheniftar merabo, lo yachzir lo achorav ela panav keneged panav”. When he leaves from his rabbi, he shouldn’t immediately turn around and go with his back to the rabbi, but he should turn around and walk out with his face toward the rabbi.

—

Halacha 13 – Standing Before One’s Teacher

Rambam’s Words:

“One is obligated to stand before his teacher from when he sees him from a distance, as far as the eye can see, until he is hidden from his eyes and he no longer sees him, and then he may sit.”

Explanation:

He continues, the law of standing before one’s teacher. “Standing before one’s teacher” – perhaps you can make a chapter. “One is obligated to stand before his teacher from when he sees him from a distance, as far as the eye can see, until he is hidden from his eyes and he no longer sees him.” When he sees the teacher from as far as when one can already see him, until when one can no longer see him. “And he no longer sees him” means not only that you cannot see his face, but you cannot see his body, “and then he may sit.” Only after that should he sit down.

—

Law 13 (Continued) – Greeting One’s Teacher on the Festival

Rambam’s Words:

“A person is obligated to greet his teacher on the festival.”

Explanation:

Further, a law, “A person is obligated to greet his teacher on the festival.” There is an obligation for a person to go on Yom Tov to greet his teacher. It could be that this has to do with the fact that on Yom Tov one must learn half the day. Okay, on Shabbos there is also an obligation to learn. No, this is honor. Everything you see here is honor, the order of conduct, how one conducts oneself with honor toward the teacher. And on Yom Kippur there are even laws that even though one may not wash, one may enter into water, into a lake, because one must go to greet one’s teacher on the festival. It is a great obligation.

—

Law 14 – Honor of a Student Before the Teacher

Rambam’s Words:

“One does not give honor to a student in the presence of the teacher, unless it is the teacher’s way to honor him.”

Explanation:

He continues, “One does not give honor to a student in the presence of the teacher.” One may not give honor to another student in front of the teacher, because this is also a matter of being in the presence of the teacher. “Unless it is the teacher’s way”, unless it is the way of honor, but if the teacher himself gives honor to that student, then that is the will of the teacher.

—

Law 14 (Continued) – Service to the Teacher, Slave’s Tasks

Rambam’s Words:

“All tasks that a slave performs for his master, a student performs for his teacher. And if it was a place where they recognize him and he did not have tefillin, and he is concerned lest they say he is a slave, he does not put on his shoe nor remove it.”

Explanation:

He continues, “All tasks that a slave performs for his master, a student performs for his teacher.” It is an obligation or it is a mitzvah, it is a matter. He will explain the paragraph. He continues, “And if it was a place where they recognize him and he did not have tefillin”, a teacher, a student does all tasks, he does, he should conduct himself like a slave. But, he says, if a person comes together with the teacher to a place, and people see, people should see how he honors his teacher, he does things for him, he carries, he transports, and people think he is a slave, people will not want to arrange marriages with him. If he wears tefillin, then one sees on him proof that he is not a slave. “And if it was a place where they recognize him and he did not have tefillin”, he does not wear tefillin, “and he is concerned lest they say he is a slave”, that people should think he is a slave, “he does not put on his shoe nor remove it”, then he should not in front of the teacher put on shoes or take off his shoes. This is like a task that only a slave does.

Observation: A Story with a Rebbe and the Four Species

I heard that there was a certain rebbe who did not allow his chassidim to come with the four species into the beis medrash during his davening. Apparently this is the matter, that one should see that they are slaves, and that they should indeed be able to continue to take off his shoes. Because if they themselves come with tefillin or with a holy object, people will think they are not slaves.

—

Law 14 (Continued) – One Who Prevents His Student from Serving Him

Rambam’s Words:

“And anyone who prevents his student from serving him, prevents from him kindness, and removes from him fear of Heaven.”

Explanation:

He continues the law, “And anyone who prevents his student from serving him”, someone wants to be an extra nice teacher, he doesn’t want to let his student serve him, “prevents from him kindness”, he prevents from his student kindness, he prevents from his student the opportunity to do a mitzvah. It is a favor for the student that he humbles himself before the teacher, that he acquires more Torah. It doesn’t only help the teacher, it helps the student as much as it helps the teacher. “And removes from him fear of Heaven”, he takes away fear of Heaven, as we learned earlier, “Fear of your teacher is like fear of Heaven.”

—

Law 14 (End) – One Who Belittles His Teacher’s Honor

Rambam’s Words:

“And any student who belittles any matter of his teacher’s honor…”

Explanation:

The Rambam continues, “And any student who belittles any matter of his teacher’s honor”, I taught him that it is honor of the Divine Presence, and also because it takes away Jerusalem, as we said. But it takes away Jerusalem, as the teacher says with the Divine Presence.

Rambam Laws of Torah Study Chapter 5 – Honor of One’s Teacher (Continued)

Law 12 (Continued) – One Who Belittles His Teacher’s Honor Causes the Divine Presence to Depart

The Rambam continues, “Any student who belittles any matter of his teacher’s honor, causes the Divine Presence to depart from Israel”, a student who belittles the matter of the laws of honor of his teacher, causes the Divine Presence to leave the Jewish people.

Ah, such a sharp thing, why? This is a further… as we learned earlier that it is honor of the Divine Presence, and also that it takes away fear of Heaven, as we said. The Rambam continues, the teacher and the Divine Presence go together, not that they go together, the teacher represents the Divine Presence. Very good.

Law 15 – If He Saw His Teacher Transgressing Words of Torah

Further he says, “If he saw his teacher transgressing words of Torah”, ah, we learned earlier that one may not decide halacha in the presence of one’s teacher, but what happens if one sees the teacher transgressing words of Torah? He sees he is not learning, he sees he needs to make a correction, he sees that the teacher forgot or didn’t say something.

I have the same thing, I have my attendant, my servant before me, when he mentions some Torah that he heard, he should say, “If I may, I heard from our teacher,” that’s how the teacher taught us. Okay.

One sees sometimes in books, they bring a midrash quoted in the book of my teacher. It could be that this is the matter.

Law 15 (Continued) – He Should Not Say Something He Did Not Hear from His Teacher

“And he should not say something he did not hear from his teacher, until he says in whose name he said it”, he should not say something he did not hear from his teacher, if yes, he should say from whom he heard it.

What does this mean? It is a matter that he should not transmit false statements in the name of the teacher. This is obvious. This is not a matter of honor. Because if it was said now that everything should be said “this is how the teacher taught me,” when he says something else that is not in the name of the teacher, people will think he is still saying it in the name of the teacher, he must say clearly from whom it comes, like the law of “one who says something in the name of the one who said it,” so there should be no errors.

Okay, but the Rambam places it here, because here is how… something doesn’t seem right to me. Perhaps he means when he speaks of the teacher, if he says yes before the teacher, he tells him, “I heard from our teacher, another teacher, from Rabbi Yankel, from Rabbi so-and-so”? Yes. I don’t know clearly…

Law 15 (End) – When One’s Teacher Passes Away

And if he passes away, when his teacher dies, he tears all his garments until he exposes his heart, and he never mends it. This is all how he conducts himself. This from law 10 until here was the order of how a student conducts himself toward his teacher.

Law 16 – Primary Teacher: Definition

These matters are said regarding one’s primary teacher. What does a teacher mean? The Rambam says, “In what case are these things said? Regarding one’s primary teacher.” What does primary mean? “From whom he learned most of his wisdom.”

What Does “Most of His Wisdom” Mean?

What does most of his wisdom mean? I think here he means most things that you know, you know from this teacher. That’s what he means. The Rema says, what does most of his wisdom mean? It means the teacher who taught you to understand, proper intellect, and to understand things. Not a lot of information or a lot of… Let’s learn what it says here.

What does most of his wisdom mean? A primary teacher is not that one. A primary teacher that is written here is most things that you know… most of his wisdom, but it is not necessarily in quantity, because the person taught you to understand, the person taught you to think, he taught you intellect, he taught you forms. He didn’t teach you many explanations.

“His Wisdom” Means Talmud, Not Scripture and Mishnah

“But if he did not learn from him most of his wisdom”, he is not his primary teacher. All these Shulchan Aruchs that you bring, I hold that one must bring the Shulchan Aruch, because the person who thinks one must bring the Shulchan Aruch in our time, it is not a mitzvah, because the Shulchan Aruch speaks of a different situation. All these Talmuds speak in a completely different world of a student with a teacher, where the teacher truly taught things. The world didn’t yet have books.

Most of his wisdom means literally, everything, most things that you know. Some things you know from that one, some things you know from that one, but most things you know, you know from him.

“But if he did not learn from him most of his wisdom, this is a student-colleague”, and he is not his primary student, but a student-colleague, and they are more on one level. “He is obligated in his honor in all these matters”, one is not obligated with such a strong level of honor, but there are still certain laws of honor, such as “standing before him”, one must stand before him, “and tearing for him”, one must tear keriah, “just as one tears for all the dead that one mourns for them”, he receives a law like one of the seven close relatives for whom one must tear keriah, but not a tear that is not mended.

Until When Is He Called a Teacher?

He continues, until when is he called a teacher? That his wisdom, he brings the Gemara in Moed Katan, his wisdom means a student, because a sage doesn’t mean Scripture and Mishnah, Scripture and Mishnah is the world of the Tannaim. The teacher today is a student, he must teach and understand and be able to make reasoning and be able to compare one matter to another, etc.

No, I don’t think so. One teaches it, one must do it several times with him, there is no secret in this, there is no foundation of logic. He must say, be able to do, and begin to feel. He is an educator in reasoning. One who is an educator in reasoning, he does reasoning with him for years, for years he learns with him until he understands on his own. Okay.

Practical Difference: “Three Months” Is Not Enough

But in short, it must… What does it mean a teacher who is not primary? One must learn more than one must learn in all Scripture and Mishnah. Just to be clear, people, when one says today “he is like a community,” I did not learn most things from him, but the way I learn I got from him. In short, you learned with him three months.

No, we learned chapter 4, we learned that the essence of Torah, that is wisdom. In other words, knowing all Scripture and all Mishnah is easier than that. That is basic. If one speaks of that level, true.

Law 17 – Even One Thing

Further he says, what does it mean a teacher who is not primary? He says, “Even if he only learned from him one thing, whether small or great”, even if he only learned from him one thing, a small thing, but in any case he must stand before him and tear for him, one must tear keriah for him.

What Does “One Thing” Mean?

This is even less than a student-colleague. This is a great wonder, because the simple meaning is that the law understands that everyone, every two friends, learns something one from the other. You are certainly my primary teacher, but such a level is certain. The small thing, great thing, I am a world for you, I am a Torah scholar. So, what does it mean a teacher who is not primary?

No, I’m speaking here of keriah. One tears keriah more for friends. A student from whom one learned something. I think every Jew in shul must know what “a great thing in words of Torah” means. It doesn’t mean that he once repeated a Chasam Sofer during davening. No, you learned something with him, something. I learned from him something, something important.

Discussion: Chassidim and Their Rebbe

What about all the chassidim who have a rebbe, who is just a rebbe because his father was a rebbe, do they tear keriah? And you actually learned from a rav in your beis medrash, every week you learn from him Shalosh Seudos Torah, do you tear keriah for him?

But why must one tear keriah? What is the question? No, this is a law. Let’s not argue about a law. I am a friend with you, “whatever,” is a different “situation.” But here you have a rav, a maggid shiur here in shul, he teaches the laws of Pesach before Pesach. Why must one tear keriah for him? Yes.

Law 17 (Continued) – A Torah Scholar Greater Than Him in Wisdom

The Baraisa says, “And similarly a Torah scholar with whom people are pleased.” No, wait. All these things are, when there is a “level” of a primary teacher, and there is a teacher from whom one learned something, and there is a “level” of a teacher from whom one didn’t learn anything at all, but someone who is great in wisdom one must have for him some respect.

The Gemara says, “A Torah scholar with whom people are pleased” – a Torah scholar whose character traits are very refined, he has a kind of completeness, he has good character. So what? So one “speaking before one who is greater than him in wisdom”, even if he did not learn from him, he protests.

What Does “Speaking Before One Who Is Greater Than Him in Wisdom” Mean?

“One sage speaking before one who is greater than him in wisdom.” What is the meaning? He hears from him differently. Differently than saying, he will want to hear from him differently than asking from me. Differently shows that the other one knows a bit better than you. He doesn’t challenge him. Challenging one may do.

I think this is also the meaning of the Shelah HaKadosh who struggled a bit, it means, I may argue with my teacher, not become angry. You are with your teacher. Your teacher is something… why is he your teacher? Because he knows something you don’t know. First of all, hear him out. You may argue, but try, you don’t have to accept everything he says. The same thing, that this applies even to everyone who is greater than him, not only his primary teacher.

A Condition to Be Able to Learn

I think that besides the matter of honor of Torah scholars, it is apparently a great condition to be able to learn. Because when a person hears something and he already thinks quickly of how he will refute it, he doesn’t even hear it out so well. First “digest” what the other one says with complete integrity. Only then you must think how it fits with your Torah that you already know.

This is what you say, the one who is engaged with intentions. I’m not saying, I have Torah biases, a person who comes to my shiur, I’m not saying one must believe everything I say, I myself don’t believe everything I say. But there are people who don’t grasp that one may listen. Presumably if you come to my shiur, I have something you need to buy. At least I have prepared the topic more than you prepared. It will be heard after I transmit the thing to you.

No, it’s a loophole that people have, when everything they hear, ah, it fits with some Torah I already heard once, he doesn’t become much wiser, because he only collects onto his existing Torah. But put everything aside and listen fully, this is engaged with intentions. And becoming wise well, one doesn’t have to be so great. A young man prepared a shiur in honor of Purim on the topic, he is now a good student, he will know the topic.

What Does “With Intentions” Mean?

Very good. So the engaged with intentions is there, one doesn’t have to think specifically that he has good character traits, it could be his views are already directed. What he knows he puts aside, now he can hear new things. I think with intentions means yes views, because with intentions is the language of the way of the mitzvah, remember, directing toward the truth, it’s like precise.

Law 18 – The Teacher Who Forgoes His Honor

There is a Rema, the primary teacher, what happens if someone did not follow, he was not regular, he did not give honor to the teacher. I think he can forgive his honor.

The Rema says, “And the primary teacher who forgoes his honor in all these matters, whether for all his students or for one of them, it is forgiven. And the student must honor his teacher even though he forgave.”

Distinction Between “Honor” and “Respect”

I think here the laws, not everyone can forgive his honor. I think forgiving means to say that he can say from today and onward, one may interrupt during the shiur, yes, or you don’t need to stand before me, and the like.

But it doesn’t help, because “even though he forgave, the student is obligated to respect him, and the student must respect his teacher even though he forgave.” Perhaps the respect means something that is less than honor? You see that there is respect and honor. Meaning to say, it doesn’t mean that because the teacher forgave one may conduct oneself toward him like a friend. One must still have respect.

No, it must be this way, because if the rebbe says “sit,” and he doesn’t listen, he stands up, he is conducting himself with disgrace, he is not regular. One must still find other ways to be mehadder (show honor), he shouldn’t now make a gezeira shava (logical inference), that just as the rebbe said one doesn’t need to stand up, there is no longer any din kavod (law of honor). What the rav commands he is mochel (forgives), but other dinei hiddur (laws of showing honor) still exist.

He brings here on the side, it appears hiddur is as we will see. Just as they will soon go see by kima (standing), they will see that there is a level called kima, there is hiddur. So hiddur, I mean, one must still be mehadder, and that doesn’t help, on that there is no mechila (forgiveness) at all. Now we will learn it. But you know, now we have learned how strong and how strict

Rambam Hilchot Talmud Torah Chapter 5 – The Rebbe’s Forgiveness and Honor of the Student

The Rebbe’s Forgiveness – The Boundaries of Mechila

Not thoroughly. He says, he must still be mehadder to the rebbe in other ways. He shouldn’t now make a gezeira shava, that just as the rebbe said one doesn’t need to stand up, and no longer do any dinei kavod, that the rebbe will say he is mochel. But the other dinei hiddur still exist.

He brings here on the side, he says that hiddur is as we will soon go see, kima is a hiddur. There are hiddurim. Such hiddurim, he means one must still be mehadder, and that doesn’t help, on that there is no mechila at all.

Halacha 19 – The Rebbe Must Honor the Student

The Turning Point of Chapter 5

Now we will learn it. Until now we have learned how strong and how strict it is that the talmid (student) must honor his rebbe. Now the Rambam turns around the rope and he says that the rebbe may also honor the talmid, not only may he, he must.

Even though he forgives, he is obligated to honor him. Yes. The Rambam says further, “Just as the students are obligated in honor of the rebbe, so the rebbe must honor his students and draw them close.” He must honor his students and be mekarev (draw close) them. “Thus the Sages said, ‘Let the honor of your student be as dear to you as that of your friend.’” You must honor your students as you honor your friends. Or more literally translated, the honor of your students should be as dear to you as your friends. That means, if someone disgraces your friends, you will be so strongly disturbed, you should care about their honor.

Students Are “The Children Who Give Pleasure in This World and the World to Come”

“And a person must be careful with his students and love them, for they are the children who give him pleasure in this world and in the world to come.” They are the children who give him pleasure in this world, they serve him, as we learned earlier, they do things for him, and in the world to come, because the rebbe is his father for the life of the world to come, but also the student is his rebbe’s father for the life of the world to come.

He will bring out a Gemara that it cannot be that from a rebbe who became corrupt, it cannot be that the student should have the world to come? Do you have another Gemara about Rabbi Meir and Acher? Rabbi Meir and Acher, very good. Yes, but it can be very good, because as we learned at the beginning of the chapter that a student is a kal vachomer (logical inference) from a rebbe, because he brings him to the life of the world to come. Well, obviously, every father loves his children because he makes him a father of the life of this world. So it’s a kal vachomer one must love his students because they make him a father in the world to come.

Halacha 20 – Students Make the Rebbe Wiser

“I Have Learned Much Wisdom from My Friends More Than from My Teachers, and from My Students More Than from All”

He also says, students are massive in the wisdom of the rebbe, they make the rebbe become wiser, because he has to whom to teach, they broaden his heart. The Sages say, thus the Sages have told us, “I have learned much wisdom from my friends more than from my teachers,” I learned from my friends more than from my teachers. It’s very interesting. “And from my students more than from all.”

This statement goes a bit against everything that was learned about the honor of the rebbe. If so, friends are no less important, students are no less important. One can say that every statement that is extreme, it could be that one only learns from friends after one has learned the wisdom from the teachers. The fact is, if one is an am ha’aretz (ignoramus), one learns nothing from friends. Once one is already a talmid chacham (Torah scholar), one has learned from the teachers, now one can begin learning from everyone. One begins to value small weak things.

“A Small Tree Ignites the Large One” – Rabbi Yochanan’s Parable

Rabbi Yochanan said in other words that a student-friend, one must indeed respect the student-friend. He writes that “a small tree ignites the large one,” you shouldn’t think what can the small student do for the rebbe? Just as a small piece of wood can ignite a large tree, “so a small student sharpens the rebbe,” a small student can sharpen the rebbe’s wisdom, “until he brings out from him through his questions glorious wisdom.”

He can extract from his questions, through the questions of the student the rebbe can bring out in practice glorious wisdom. He means to say that a student, a small student, when he asks questions, the rebbe understands better to give over what he understands? He understands it better. The rebbe himself understands it better, because the student asks him such foolish questions, and he says, “Didn’t we learn yesterday that the rebbe may not, lo yakpid melamed (the teacher should not be strict)?”

So afterwards he will extract from himself, how does the glorious wisdom come? The rebbe already knew it in potential, but he brings it to actuality, he brings out glorious wisdom from the rebbe through the student.

“What Is Your Request, Up to Half the Kingdom”

Just as when she learns that the king says, “What is your request, up to half the kingdom,” the question of the student can bring up to half the kingdom.

Summary – The Arc of Chapter 5

As it says in Chapter 5, it’s very interesting, we learned that one must honor the rebbe, and at the end we learned that the rebbe must also honor the student.