REASON FOR THE EXISTENCE OF ALTERNATING METHODS OF LEARNING TORAH IN DIFFERENT GENERATIONS KOHELES WRITES: Do not say, ‘How was it that former times were better than these?’ That is not a question prompted by reason. Wisdom is good with an inheritance, and even more so to those who see the sun. To sit in the shelter of wisdom is to sit in the shelter of money, and the advantage of knowledge is that wisdom preserves the life of its possessors.¹

footnotes: ¹ Eccl. 7:10–12.

The explanation [of this passage] is that [Solomon], the wise one, through Divine Spirit, cautions scoffers [not to mock earlier generations] merely because these later generations were accustomed to the science of pilpul. Previous generations did not employ this [analytical] approach, and even so, they reached a level of competence as authoritative as the written Torah, for their main goal was to learn for the purpose of religious practice. [Solomon therefore warns] that it is wrong to mock them [and think] that if you were as knowledgeable regarding the sources that were available to the previous generations, you would reject the structure of laws developed by that generation [because they did not possess the art of pilpul]. “That is not a question prompted by reason,” since you do not possess a monument or name² in the area of adjudication. On the other hand, if you condescendingly believe that if you were given the opportunity to make decisions and that you can do so without the art of pilpul, that is only foolishness and arrogance. Since you lack the traditions of the clearly-defined laws from the great Torah academies, we are compelled to draw from the deep waters with [deep] analysis.

footnotes: ² Isa. 56:5.

It is true “that wisdom is good with an inheritance” – in other words, it is surely superior to have wisdom obtained through “inheritance,” meaning tradition, more than wisdom that is obtained through pilpul, [for wisdom transmitted by tradition is not subject to the error] that may result from examination and the weighing of various arguments, which, as I previously noted, was Nahmanides’s view as reflected in his writings.³

footnotes: ³ See Chapter 11 supra.

[Koheles continues], “And even more so to those who see the sun,” the sun is the source of light [and is thus] symbolic of the light of Torah. (As it is written: “For the Lord God is a sun and a shield, favor and glory does God bestow; He withholds no goodness from those who walk in perfect innocence.”⁴ The interpretation of this verse is that even though the sun bestows favor and glory upon every life form, none is [protected] from the sun when it is burning hot, [for at such a time] they all are in need of some form of a shield or cover.

footnotes: ⁴ Psalms 84:12.

So it is with the light of Torah: it bestows favor and glory upon those who are diligent in its study. As is said in Tractate Avodah Zarah 3b, “Anyone who studies Torah at night, the Lord strings a thread of grace around him during the day.”⁵ on Ex. 22:22 where the Netziv writes that according to Tractate *Avodah Zarah,*if a scholar studies the Torah at night, the prayers that he utters by day are answered by God. It is stated in Shemos Rabba, parshah 38, that the Book of Chronicles does not associate anyone with glory until it discusses Osniel, who is known as Ya’abetz,⁶ for he had toiled in the study of Torah. [However, the Torah, like the sun, can at times be harmful]. As explained in Tractate Yoma 72b, if one is not meritorious, i.e., he does not study the Torah diligently so as to understand it properly, the Torah] “smelts him” to death. However, when one walks in pure innocence, he constantly benefits from its light. This explains the verse, “that the Lord God is a sun and a shield,” and also explains, “Favor and glory does God bestow; He withholds no goodness from those who walk in perfect innocence”). [Now that we have established that the sun is symbolic of the source of the Torah, it seems clear that] the verse in Koheles expresses the view that one who understands the sources and traditions of this “inheritance,” that is, the tradition coupled with its rationale, is the superior approach [in determining Halachah]. As I wrote previously,⁷ this trait was characteristic of King Solomon’s wisdom.

footnotes: ⁵ See Harhev Davar ⁶ See note 4 supra. ⁷ See chapter 7 supra.

The verse then continues, “For to sit in the shelter of wisdom is to sit in the shelter of money.” This means that as money provides shelter [security], everyone comprehends that it is better to gain money through inheritance rather than to have to toil for it and experience frustration. However, there is an advantage to obtaining wealth though one’s personal toil in business: that experience makes a person aware of [business practices], more than if one received his knowledge through inheritance.

Obviously, one who inherits money is likely to become knowledgeable in business practices; for the possession of money itself accustoms a person to business, [as expressed in the saying:] “Money leads one to doing business.”⁸ 63b, which states: “A man’s funds perform a service of brokerage for him” – that is, a person who possesses sufficient funds does not need a broker. But those who inherit money do not become as knowledgeable in [business as those who acquire wealth through their own efforts]. However, [gaining expertise in business] is not [totally analogous] to [acquiring] Torah knowledge, for it is a fact that when knowledge is acquired through much analysis, one acquires the ability to make decisions in unclear circumstances, more than one who has acquired knowledge through tradition. Nevertheless, when knowledge is acquired through tradition, one is more likely to decide correctly, [since the accumulation of authentic knowledge] guides one to arrive at the truth in a straight path.

footnotes: ⁸ This expression originates from Tractate Bava Metzia

[This is what Koheles refers to when he states:] “For to sit in the shelter of wisdom is to sit in the shelter of money.” [In the shelter of wisdom one receives honor, and the shelter of money provides one with his practical needs]. For both honor and livelihood are equally important, each one in its own way. [Torah knowledge as represented by honor] sustains the soul with its clear guidance, because you have gained clearly defined laws, whilst [livelihood] sustains the body through material assets. However, [as stated by Koheles], “The advantage of knowledge is that wisdom preserves the life of its possessors,” meaning that wisdom is more likely to lead one to the end goal [of fully sustaining the soul], than how money will achieve its objective [of fully sustaining one physically].⁹

footnotes: ⁹ This is explained by the Netziv in greater detail in Part 3.

Just as it is understood that there is no value in wealthy people questioning why the poor need to apply so much more effort to their business than they, similarly there is no value gained by questioning why in these times we need to be more diligent in our Torah study than the earlier generations. For, as we have already explained, [the earlier generations] were rich in the traditions and the explanations of the laws, as well as their scope. This is not so in these times, where we hunger for God’s word, which is Jewish law.

An additional reason why later generations need to work harder in order to determine Jewish law is that the [nature of the world has changed from former times]. [This is evident] from the way the taste and the quality of fruits have changed in the later generations. As it is taught towards the end of Tractate Sotah, “R. Shimon the son of Elazar said: ‘When purity was suspended from the [Jewish people], the [special] taste and aroma of fruits was suspended from the world.’”¹⁰ 48a. [This means that] whatever happens to the spiritual level of the Jewish people affects the world. Many other examples are cited [in Tractate Sotah] to demonstrate this concept. Since the later generations lack this trait of purity, there is a need [to compensate] by sweetening the lives of mankind through diligent study and analysis. It was the saintliness and sincerity of earlier generations that greatly assisted them to determine the truth without the need of much analysis and toil. As is stated in the Jerusalem Talmud in Tractate Berachos, chapter 5, The pious men of the earlier generations would meditate for an hour before and for one hour after their prayers. If this is so, how did they have enough time to conduct their studies or business? Said R. Yitzchak of the School of R. Eliezer: “Since they were pious, a blessing was bestowed upon their studies and labor, [so that with minimal toil] they were equally successful in both directions in achieving the desired result.”

footnotes: ¹⁰ Sotah

[The great Amora, Rava, also understood that due to their holiness and saintliness, earlier generations were more worthy to determine the truth], as stated in Tractate Shabbos 134b: “He (Rava) said to himself, ‘Why did I have to take issue with the interpretations of the elders [that is, R. Yehuda and Ravin bar Avuha]?’”¹¹ This [demonstrates] that it was clear to Rava that since [R. Yehuda and Ravin bar Avuha] were from the earlier generations, they were more likely to determine the truth. [These earlier generations were superior in their ability to discern the truth because of], their holiness and righteousness. As is recorded in Tractate Berachos20a [pertaining to the generation of R. Yehuda], “R. Papa asked Abayye why it was that in earlier generations they experienced miracles, while in our generation we do not experience miracles…. It is because earlier generations risked their lives for the sanctification of God’s name, and we do not.” This was a consistent pattern throughout the different generations: that there were alternating styles in learning Torah. One generation consistently applied deep analysis, while another generation relied heavily on tradition. These alternating styles reflected the varying levels of righteousness of the different generations.

footnotes: ¹¹ Rava was prompted to make this statement because he became ill after he instructed a man to bathe his baby on the Sabbath in a manner contrary to the opinion of R. Yehuda and Ravin bar Avuha.