2021/5781
I. In Search of a Curriculum
One could reasonably have expected, in light of the rarified status which the mitzvah of Talmud Torah occupies, summa omnium, to find robust sourcing within core texts, both in Torah SheBechtav as well as Torah SheBa’al Peh, concerning the required curriculum of study. Upon examination, however, the pickings are rather slim, and the attendant surprise, conversely, abounds.
On the Torah level, we are indeed informed as to what constitutes the minimum amount of study for a father to discharge his obligation to teach his son. At the rabbinic plane, one does identify a slew of requirements concerning studying particular sections of Torah, most notably, reviewing the weekly Parashah twice with Targum, studying the laws of the holidays both in advance of the festivals, as well as on the festivals themselves.
And yet, the sheer dearth of clear sources delineating a required curriculum of study remains striking, if not shocking. On the contrary, even if this interpretation is somewhat superficial, the fact that the Talmud asserts, “Ein Adam Lomeid Ela BeMakom SheLibo Chafeitz”, seems to strike the opposite chord. What is obliged, apparently, is that we study; the curriculum, on the other hand, is a matter of the heart, subject to personal predilection. And, while those inclinations are viewed divergently by Chazal, with Ba’alei Talmud securing a place of greater admiration than Ba’alei Mishnah, and certainly, Ba’alei Mikra, normative positions concerning this hierarchy are not assumed.
II. LeOlam YeShalesh Adam: The Sugya in Avodah Zarah
It is in this relative vacuum that we turn our attention to the primary text which we will analyze. In two different places, and with critical distinctions between the relevant passages which will be explored in this essay, Chazal presents a requirement, “LeOlam Yeshalesh Adam Shenotav, Shelish BeMikra, Shelish BeMishnah, Shelish BeTalmud”.
In light of uncertainty as to a person’s expected longevity, the Talmud further refines this three fold requirement to the daily realm, obliging study of Torah SheBichtav, as well as two distinct areas of Torah SheBa’al Peh, encompassing basic knowledge, and more analytical study.
As presented in the Sugya in Avodah Zarah, one is left with a freestanding obligation, a Din within Hilchot Talmud Torah to divide one’s days between the study of these three disciplines of study. Both the purpose and nature of the Halachah remain undefined, as does the precise method of division.
Rashi, for one advocates dividing one’s week into three units of forty-eight hour periods, each one devoted to one of the three relevant disciplines. The Ba’alei Tosafot, in a rather astounding critique, reject this view as subject to the same fundamental uncertainty regarding personal longevity, despite the obvious response that the imbalance would at most be a matter of some forty eight hours.
In any case, in light of this difficulty with Rashi’s approach, the Ba’alei Tosafot present a wholly different reading of the passage. Rather than obliging a precise division of time and labor between these three areas, perhaps the Talmud is simply obliging, on a daily basis, that we engage in all three areas of study. As such, they note, the practice has emerged to recite, as part of davening, certain sections of Mikra, Mishnah, and Talmud.
The most dramatic expression of this understanding is certainly the position of Rabbenu Tam, who felt that this obligation might be satisfied through the study of Talmud Bavli alone, insofar as it encompasses a great deal of Mishnah as well as Mikra. This view gained certain purchase in the halakhic realm, and was cited by the Rema.
III. Al Tikri VeShinantem Ela VeShilashtem: The Sugya in Kiddushin
In a more extensive passage in Kiddushin, Chazal present the aforementioned requirement in a wholly different vein. There, Chazal derive the obligation from a Pasuk, at minimum, raising the specter that one is dealing with a curriculum determined by Torah law, and not merely a rabbinic obligation. Moreover, the particular pasuk chosen, “VeShinantem LeVanecha”, is itself one of the two primary sources from which the obligation of Talmud Torah is derived.
Perhaps most significantly, the presentation in Kiddushin, based on V’Shinantem- “Al TIkri VeShinantam Ela VeShilashtem”- inexorably affiliates the ostensibly Biblical requirement of dividing one’s time into three equal sections, with another derivation of VeShinantem, “SheYehu Divrei Torah Mechudadim BeFicha”, the obligation to master all of Torah, to the point where one who is asked a particular question should be able to respond immediately and without hesitation, “Al Tigamgem, Ela, Emor Lo MiYad.”
This understanding of the passage in Kiddushin as conveying the nature of the Din, and not merely its substance, is strengthened by the continuation of the Gemara, in which Chazal laud the capacity of certain Torah scholars to easily identify the middle letter of the Torah, the middle verse, and other highly impressive feats reflecting profound erudition. Indeed, the Meiri asserts that the entire basis for dividing one’s Torah labor into three distinct elements is predicated on the pursuit of mastering the core responsibilities of Torah study, “Ad SheYehu Kalul BeYediat Kol HaDevarim.”
In truth, to the extent that the gemara in Kiddushin, contra the bare bones presentation in Avodah Zarah, sheds light on the nature of the obligation- mastery- it is clear that the substance of the obligation must also be revisited.
As such, presuming that mastery is best achieved based on a deviation from dividing one’s learning into precise thirds, such latitude may be a logical conclusion. The Ran, for example, adopts this position, “Lav Davka Yashlish Ela Yiten Kol Echad HaRaui Lo,” as does the Ramah, who argues that only earlier generations had the capacity to continue to devote a full third of their time to study of Mikra in adulthood and still master Torah SheBa’al Peh.
Conversely, to the extent that mastery may not be a realistic goal, it is conceivable that one might perceive differentiated curricula on the basis of distinct audiences. The Derishah, for one, assumed that Rabbenu Tam’s prescription would not be advisable for Ba’alei Batim, who, given the limited amount of time available for their study, should strive to have direct daily exposure to all three disciplines.
In other words, for those for whom VeShilashtem may not be a realistic path towards VeShinantam, given the limits on their time, the sugya in Avodah Zarah, advocating an equal division of all three areas, as opposed to the more ambitious standards of Kiddushin, remains the controlling passage.
IV. Shitat HaRambam: A Dual Construct
Rambam’s view constitutes a novel synthesis of the two different sugyot. On the one hand, Rambam, in accordance with the sugya in Avodah Zarah, requires daily engagement with all three disciplines of Torah, encompassing Mikra, Mishnah, and Talmud. On the other hand, Rambam, in keeping with the Sugya in Kiddushin, confirms that the nature of this obligation is indeed to achieve full mastery of the entire corpus of extant Torah knowledge.
As such, Rambam only relaxes the obligation to engage in this meticulous division only once one has achieved the requisite degree of mastery. At such a point, one is enjoined to fully immerse oneself in Talmud, with its emphasis on novelty, creativity, discovery of new principles and concepts, and the underlying basis for Halachic norms.
Nevertheless, Rambam, even for those who reached the level of sovereign mastery, KiSheYagdil BeChochmah, still requires discrete, though, not daily, periods of study in Mikra and Mishnah, for the specific purpose of preventing loss of Torah knowledge. In other words, even after the obligations presented in the sugya in Kiddushin have been satisfied, the Sugya in Avodah Zarah, which mandates engagement in all three disciplines of Torah, remains active.
A critical feature of Rambam’s novel understanding of the Halachah is precisely what the gemara in Avodah Zarah requires. As one is gaining mastery, Rambam rules that the mandate demands meticulous division of time between the three disciplines, to the minute. Once mastery has been achieved, it is sufficient to have engagement with all three disciplines at select intervals, Be’Itim Mezumanim.
As such, it would appear that Rambam maintained a dual construct of the din of Le’Olam Yeshalesh Adam, differentiated on the basis of stage of learning and development. Initially, the obligation reflects a method by which one achieves mastery of Torah, in accordance with the parallel halakha of V’eShinantem, SheYehu Divrei Torah Mechudadim BeFicha. At a later stage of development Le’Olam Yeshalesh Adam is a method through which one retains mastery of Torah, by preventing loss of Torah knowledge.
Rambam’s view represents a breakthrough in the range of Shittot in the sugya, and is codified in full by Shulchan Aruch.
V. Conclusion
The Din of Le’Olam Yeshalesh Adam fills a critical gap in the Halakhot of Talmud Torah, which would otherwise be devoid of substantive guidance as it concerns a curriculum of study.
At minimum, on the basis of the sugya in Avodah Zarah, as codified by Rashi and Tosafot, it constitutes a daily or weekly obligation for the mitzvah of Talmud Torah to be discharged through inclusion of the three distinct realms of Mikra, Mishnah, and Talmud.
Alternatively, in light of the sugya in Kiddushin, and as is clear from the view of Me’iri, Ran, and Rama, it defines the obligation of Torah study at large to be centered around mastery of Torah.
Finally, for Rambam, it may represent a method not only through which to achieve mastery of Torah, but to retain that corpus of knowledge as well. The din of Yeshalesh Adam is malleable: as one gains mastery, it requires meticulous division of time between the three disciplines of Torah. Once mastery has been achieved, it merely requires ongoing engagement with all three disciplines.
In this respect, LeOlam Yeshalesh Adam serves the broader purposes of VeShinantem, of unfailing, unhesitating mastery over all of Torah, Al Tigamgem, Ela Emor Lo MiYad. It enables building towards that lofty plane of Torah knowledge, and serves as the vital scaffolding ensuring that those who scale such heights do not sustain diminution and regression.