THE THREE "LESSER" STUDENTS OF RYBZ

Without judging them myself, the text of Avot suggests that R. Yehoshua, R. Yose, and R. Shim`on were in some ways less strikingly brilliant than R. Eli`ezer b. Hurqanos and R. El`azar b. Arakh. I say that because in the original Mishnah presenting these 5, there were two versions as to which one RYBZ thought outweighed all the Sages of Israel, and these three were not named. In examining their statements as recorded in these three Mishnayot, we will also not find particularly illuminating insight—rather, well-formulated statements of important principles of religiosity. We will be even more interested in how Maharal reacts to these relatively simple statements.

A STRANGE WORDING ALERTS MAHARAL

In Mishnah 11, R. Yehoshua is quoted as saying that "an evil eye, an evil inclination, and hating other creatures (probably people) remove a person from the world." Maharal notes the oddity of the phrase "remove a person from the world" as a way of expressing displeasure with a person’s character or actions. He suggests that an important element of a person’s living in this world is to provide him with qiyum, with lasting capabilities. R. Yehoshua, he suggests, is mentioning three aspects of life that take away a person’s qiyum.

How do these three elements get chosen? Maharal notes that there are three elements to this world that verses in the Torah refer to as "ra", evil, the eye, the inclination (yetser), and the heart. If a person has any of these things being evil, that will prevent that person from having a lasting presence in the world. The three elements mentioned in the Mishnah, then, correspond to these three—the eye and the yetser are mentioned explicitly, and sinat haberiyot, hatred of others, Maharal reads as an expression of an evil heart.

It’s worth noticing that Maharal has changed the focus of the Mishnah considerably. Read at it’s simplest, R. Yehoshua is objecting to these three things of themselves, meaning that ayin hara, yetser hara, and sin’at haberiyot were each problems that people needed to be aware of, and that could lead to a person’s being taken out of the world (whatever that phrase means). In Maharal’s reading, one of those elements has been taken as symbolizing a different problem, the problem of being a ra lev, having a bad heart. This could be what R. Yehoshu`a meant, I suppose, but it’s an odd way to express oneself—if all three of these underlying problems had been expressed as a manifestation of them, I could have understood, but since only one is, it seems a stretch to me. In addition, Maharal assumes that the characterization of things as ra in Scripture is a relevant category here, although the Mishnah does not refer to those verses in any way. Noticing these kinds of assumptions in a comment seems productive to me, since it highlights where the particular commentator was adding to the simplest reading of the text.

MISHNAH 12

In the next Mishnah, R. Yose recommends valuing someone else’s money as much as your own (meaning that you are as careful about not causing them loss as you would be about avoiding loss yourself), preparing oneself to learn Torah (for it is not an inheritance), and having all your actions be for the sake of Heaven.

CONTEXT, CONTEXT, CONTEXT

Again, Maharal assumes a context to this Mishnah that is not in evidence. Maharal notes that there are three elements to personal perfection, there is perfection in oneself, perfection in one’s relations with others, and perfection in one’s relation with God. He assumes R. Yose means to prescribe a strategy to achieve each of these perfections.

For perfection with others, he recommends valuing their money as highly as one’s own. Two Mishnayot earlier, Maharal notes, R. Eli`ezer had urged people to take their friends’ honor as seriously as their own. R. Yose believes that money is a broader category than just honor, and that in urging people to take others’ money seriously, an awareness of their honor will be included as well.

For internal perfection, the study of Torah is the key; as he notes, he explained in the first chapter of Avot that Torah helps people convert themselves from lowly physical beings into the possessors of active and well-functioning intellects, which is the essence of perfecting oneself. The preparation to which R. Yose refers, then, is the effort it takes to instill the labor of Torah study and the inculcation of its intellectual bent into oneself. In doing so, the person will perfect themselves.

The final one, have all your actions be for the sake of Heaven, creates a perfection of relationship between a person and God. Although I won’t detail the point here, I would mention that this phrase sums up the perfect life in Rambam’s view. In several places, (Hilkhot De`ot is one convenient place), Rambam says that having all of one’s actions be coordinated towards the service of God is the highest level of spiritual achievement a person can hope for. Maharal simply notes that if all of one’s actions are for the sake of Heaven, a person will have perfected his or her relationship with God.

MISHNAH 13

R. Shim`on’s statement seems understandable enough until we consider the last clause. Recommending that we be careful about Shema and Tefillah (which really means the Amidah) are, on the face of it, worthwhile adjurations, as is the one about not making one’s prayers rote. How do those connect, however, to the issue of al tehi rasha bifnei atsmekha, do not be an evildoer in private? [Note: the translation of bifnei atsmekha as "in private" is Maharal’s—others think that bifnei atsmekha means in your own eyes, so that it means "don’t think of yourself as a rasha".]

Maharal, as we might have come to expect, sees Shema and Tefilla as more broadly expressing the notions of Qabbalat Ol Malkhut Shamayim and Avodah, accepting the Mastery of the Creator and Service, respectively. The recommendation to be careful about them is not so much directed at them per se, but at the broader ideals they represent. Given those broader ideals, it becomes clearer why it is important not to have those activities be done by rote.

Interestingly, in defining qeva, prayers by rote, Maharal explicitly prefers praying by heart to praying from a siddur. In his understanding of qeva, having all the words laid out for you, to simply be recited by you, makes it clear that you are fulfilling an obligation rather than turning to God with your thoughts, hopes, and prayers. Only at the end of his comment, where he notes that no one manages to focus properly on prayers nowadays, does he grudgingly concede that if there is a worry about remembering the words of the prayer, it would be preferable to use a siddur.