Aligned sentence by sentence
. .
Chapter Four.
[]
Mishnah [1]
.
This is clear, and we have already mentioned its objectives in the preceding chapters.
[]
Mishnah [2]
.
We have already explained this saying as required in the tenth chapter of Sanhedrin (M. Sanhedrin 10).
, , ,
And the Sages (peace be upon them) drew attention to a wondrous fine point in the Torah which contains an incitement to the performance of the commandments: namely, His saying, "Then Moses set apart three cities" (Deut 4:41). For it is well known that these cities would be of no benefit, and that the ruling concerning cities of refuge would not take effect within them, until the other three—those in the land of Canaan—had also been designated. The Sages said: "Moses our Teacher knew that the three cities beyond the Jordan did not afford refuge until the three in the land of Canaan should be designated, as it is said, 'six cities of refuge shall there be' (Num 35:13)" (cf. BT Makkot 9b–10a).
, , .
He designated them solely because he said, "Since the opportunity to perform a commandment has come into my hands, let me fulfill it." Now if someone like Moses our Teacher—the way of all true realities, the most perfect of the perfect—was eager to add half a commandment for the sum of his virtue and his perfection, how much more is this fitting for those whose souls are stunted and whose stunting has become entrenched and ingrained!
[]
Mishnah [3]
, .
He says: there is inevitably some moment in which it is within any person's power to harm and to benefit, even if only in the least and most trifling of matters. So if you have despised him, that slight pain may yet reach you.
[]
Mishnah [4]
, , , , , . , , . . , , .
We have already mentioned in the preceding chapters (Again a back-reference to the *Eight Chapters* (esp. ch. 4, on the doctrine of the mean).) that humility is one of the praiseworthy character traits, and that it is the mean between haughtiness and self-abasement. The name for humility in Hebrew is *ʿanavah*, while haughtiness has many names: "haughtiness of heart" (Prov 16:5), "lofty eyes" (Ps 131:1), "pride," and "loftiness." Among the names the Sages gave it are "a high spirit," "coarseness of spirit," and "the one who exalts himself." Self-abasement is "lowliness of spirit." Now we have explained in the Fourth Chapter that a person ought to incline toward one of the two extremes so as to become established in the mean of conduct by way of precaution—except in this one character trait alone among all the traits, namely haughtiness. For because of the gravity of this trait's defect in the eyes of the virtuous, and because of their knowledge of its harm, they have moved far away from it to the other extreme and inclined toward self-abasement of the soul completely, so that not even a single trace of haughtiness should remain in the soul in any respect.
, , , , , , , , , , . .
I have read in one of the books of ethics that one of the virtuous men was asked, "Tell of a day that passed over you in the course of your life that was the most gratifying." He said: "One day I was traveling on the deck of a ship, and my place on it was in the meanest spot, and I was clad in tattered garments; and on the ship were merchants and men of wealth. I was lying down in my place, and one of the people of the ship rose to relieve himself, and his contempt for me and his disdain for my condition reached such a point that he uncovered himself and urinated upon me. I was astonished at how firmly entrenched such shamelessness had become in his soul; yet, by God, my soul felt no pain whatever at what he did, nor did any force of indignation stir within it. And I rejoiced greatly that I had reached the level at which the contempt of that base man could not pain me, and at which my soul did not turn toward him in resentment." There is no doubt that this is the utmost in self-abasement of the soul, so as to be far from haughtiness.
, , , . , . , , . " , , , .
I will now record some of what the Sages said in praise of humility and in censure of haughtiness. It was for this reason that the mishnah commanded [a posture] close to self-abasement, saying, "Be exceedingly, exceedingly lowly of spirit" (M. Avot 4:4)—out of fear that a person might remain merely at humility; beware lest there be in him a portion of haughtiness, since it is near to it, for humility is a mean, as we have mentioned. They said in praise of humility: "What did Wisdom do? It set a crown upon its head; but Humility set a heel beneath its sole, as it is written, 'The beginning of wisdom is the fear of the Lord' (Ps 111:10)." This is a proof that the fear of the Lord is more exalted than wisdom and is the cause of its existence. And it said, "On the heel of humility comes the fear of the Lord" (Prov 22:4)—meaning that the fear of the Lord flows in the train of humility, so that humility is far greater than wisdom. They said: "This matter is written in the Torah, repeated in the Prophets, and stated a third time in the Writings. Everywhere you find the might of the Holy One, blessed be He, there you find His humility (cf. BT Megillah 31a). It is written in the Torah, 'the great, mighty, and awesome God' (Deut 10:17), and immediately after it, 'who executes justice for the orphan and the widow' (Deut 10:18), and so on. It is repeated in the Prophets: 'For thus says the High and Exalted One who dwells forever, whose name is holy: I dwell on high and holy' (Isa 57:15), and He said in the same passage, 'and with the contrite and lowly of spirit' (Isa 57:15). And it is stated a third time in the Writings: 'Extol Him who rides upon the clouds, the Lord is His name' (Ps 68:5), and immediately after, 'Father of orphans and judge of widows' (Ps 68:6)."
, , , . , , . .
You may take instruction from Moses our Teacher, in whom all the rational and moral virtues were perfected, over and above his rank in prophecy—"father in wisdom, father in prophecy, father in Torah" (cf. BT Megillah 13a). Yet God praised him for all of this with the single trait of humility, saying, "Now the man Moses was exceedingly humble" (Num 12:3); and His word "exceedingly" is a proof of inclining toward the other extreme. Thus you find him saying, "And what are we?" (Exod 16:7). Likewise David, "the anointed of the God of Jacob and the sweet singer of Israel" (2 Sam 23:1), who was an obeyed king whose kingdom God had magnified, and the might of whose sword had been promised through Moses our Teacher—for he is the star that "shall step forth out of Jacob" (Num 24:17), as the Sages explained—and a prophet, and head over seventy elders, as it says, "sitting in the seat" (2 Sam 23:8): with all this, he says of himself, "a broken and crushed heart" (Ps 51:19). And there are many of these expressions indicating the utmost humility.
, . . , . - $ - $ , . $ . , , , . . .
Among what they said concerning haughtiness is their statement: "Every person in whom there is coarseness of spirit is as though he worshiped idolatry. It is written here, 'Everyone haughty of heart is an abomination to the Lord' (Prov 16:5), and it is written there, 'You shall not bring an abomination [into your house]' (Deut 7:26)" (BT Sotah 4b). And they said: "It is as though he denied the fundamental principle, as it is said, 'and your heart be lifted up and you forget the Lord your God' (Deut 8:14)." And they said that the sin of haughtiness is like one who has had relations with all the forbidden unions: He said of haughtiness, "Everyone haughty of heart is an abomination to the Lord" (Prov 16:5), and He said of the forbidden unions, "for all these abominations have they done" (Lev 18:27). And they said that the haughty man is himself, in God's reckoning, like idolatry itself, and they inferred this from His saying, "Cease from the man in whose nostrils is breath"—meaning the haughty of soul—"for in what is he to be accounted?" (Isa 2:22): they read, "in what (*bammeh*) is he accounted." And they said that the haughty man deserves to be killed: they said, "Everyone in whom there is coarseness of spirit deserves to be cut down like an *asherah*. It is written here, 'and the lofty of stature shall be cut down' (Isa 10:33), and it is written there, 'and you shall cut down their *asherim*' (Deut 7:5)'" (cf. BT Sotah 5a). And they said that God will not revive the haughty at the resurrection of the dead—that is their saying: "Every person in whom there is coarseness of spirit, his dust will not be stirred, as it is said, 'Awake and sing, you who dwell in the dust' (Isa 26:19); it does not say 'you who lie in the dust' but 'you who dwell in the dust'—he who made himself a neighbor (*shakhen*) to the dust in his lifetime" (cf. BT Sotah 5a)—meaning that the humble are the ones who shall live. And they were extreme in this, saying, "Every person in whom there is coarseness of spirit, the Shekhinah laments over him, as it is said, 'and the haughty He knows from afar' (Ps 138:6)." And there is much of their saying that *tzaraʿat* is also a punishment of the haughty: they said, "'And for a rising and for a scab' (Lev 14:56)—and 'rising' (*seʾet*) means nothing but loftiness, as it is said, 'the hills that are lifted up (*ha-nissaʾot*)' (Isa 2:14)"; so it is as though He says to the haughty man, "the scab!"
, , , , , . , , , , , .
The last of what they said is: "Rava said: 'Under a ban with it, and under a ban without it'" (cf. BT Sotah 5a)—meaning that one ought not, on the other hand, to restrict oneself to total self-abasement of the soul either, since that is not among the virtues. They estimated this, by way of example, as one part in sixty-four—meaning that if we set haughtiness at one edge and self-abasement of the soul at the other edge, with a span of sixty-four parts between them, then a person should stand at sixty-three; and they did not deem the precise mean in this trait in particular [advisable], but rather the [posture] farther from haughtiness. For if he diminishes [it] by a part and draws nearer to haughtiness, more [than that], he falls under the ban. This was Rava's view concerning humility. As for Rav Naḥman, he ruled decisively and said that one ought by no means to have any of it in him—I mean of haughtiness—neither a small portion nor a large portion, for its sin is not slight; it is a trait that makes a person "an abomination to the Lord," so how should one draw near to it? He said on this subject: "Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said: Not [some] of it and not a part of it. Is it a small thing, that of which it is written, 'Everyone haughty of heart is an abomination to the Lord' (Prov 16:5)?" (BT Sotah 5a). So, because of the severity of this sin, he said: "This is [the meaning of] 'Be exceedingly, exceedingly lowly of spirit, for the hope of man is the worm'" (M. Avot 4:4)—meaning that you ought to discipline your soul until you remove haughtiness through reflection upon the body's end, namely that it will become rot and worms.
[]
Mishnah [5]
, ,
You know from the [Scriptural] text that there is sin upon the one who acts inadvertently, and therefore he requires atonement through a sacrifice, and God says of him, "and it shall be forgiven him for his sin which he sinned" (cf. Lev 4:35).
, ,
Yet he is not, without doubt, like the deliberate transgressor, because God (exalted be He)—His justice [is too great] for Him to equate the deliberate transgressor with the inadvertent one in any matter whatsoever.
, , , .
His intent here is only that the desecration of the Name (*ḥillul ha-shem*), whether it be deliberate or inadvertent, is one for which exaction is made openly: if it was deliberate, then it is the sin of one deliberate; and if it was inadvertent, then it is the sin of one inadvertent—but each [is punished] with the two penalties openly.
[]
Mishnah [7]
, , . , , , , , , . , " .
I had wished not to speak about this admonition, because it is clear, and also because I know that my words upon it will not accord with the view of most of the great ones of the Law—indeed, perhaps with all of them. Nevertheless I will speak, and I will not care, without deference to anyone who came before or anyone in the present age. Know that this [sage] said: Do not make the Torah "a spade with which to dig" (M. Avot 4:7)—meaning, do not regard it as an instrument for earning a livelihood. And he stated plainly that anyone who derives benefit in this world from the honor of the Torah has cut off his soul from the life of the world to come. Yet people have been blind to this plain text, have cast it behind their backs, and have clung to surface expressions that they did not understand—which I shall expound—and they have imposed dues upon individuals and upon communities, and made the scholarly appointments [an occasion for] a tax-collector's law, and led people to imagine, by sheer effrontery, that this is obligatory and required—to assist the scholars and the students and the people occupied with the Law, [under the slogan] "their Torah is their craft." All of this is an error to which there is no truth in the Law, no leg upon which it can stand in any way. For if we look into the records of the Sages (may their memory be a blessing), we find among them no imposition upon people, and no collection for the great and honored academies, nor for the heads of the exiles, nor for the judges, nor for those who disseminate Torah, nor for any of the early ones, nor for the rest of the people.
, , , , , .
God forbid that I should say they did not give charity or render aid—rather, [the truth is] that had that man of weak circumstances stretched out his hand to take, they would have filled his place with gold and jewels; but he did not do so. Rather, he restricted himself to a craft by which he sustained himself, whether in plenty or in straits, and he disdained what was in people's hands, since the Law forbade him from that.
, , , . , .
You know that Hillel the Elder was a woodcutter; he would gather firewood and study under Shemaiah and Avtalyon, and he was in the utmost poverty—yet his rank is where it is, and his disciples are those who were likened to Moses and Joshua, and the least of his disciples was Rabban Yoḥanan ben Zakkai. No rational person doubts that, had he allowed the people of his age to share [their wealth] with him, he would not have continued to cut firewood. And Ḥanina ben Dosa, of whom the proclamation went forth, "The whole world is sustained for the sake of Ḥanina My son, yet Ḥanina My son suffices with a measure of carobs from one Sabbath eve to the next" (BT Berakhot 17b; Taʿanit 24b)—and he asked nothing of people.
, , , , , , , , .
We have read that there was a judge in all the land of Israel who would draw water with a bucket-rope, and when the litigants came he would say, "Either provide me someone to draw water in my stead, since I am occupied with you, or compensate me to the extent that I am kept from my work, and [then] I will judge for you." Nor were the Israelites of that age contemporary with these and others either cruel or lacking in deeds of lovingkindness. Yet we do not find a single one of the Sages of straitened circumstances censuring the people of his age for not making things easy for him—God [forbid]! Rather, they themselves were virtuous men who held the truth for its own sake, who believed in God and in the Law of Moses our Teacher, [knowing] that through it is attainment in the everlasting abode. They did not permit themselves this [taking of money], and held that it would be a desecration of the Name in the eyes of the common people—because the common people imagine the Torah to be one of the crafts by which one earns a livelihood, and so it becomes contemptible in their eyes, and the one who does this proves to be one who "despises the word of the Lord" (Num 15:31).
, , , , .
The only ones who erred were these people who contend against the truth and the plain texts in taking people's money—whether with their consent or against their will: the [maintenance cases] that they find in the Talmud concerning groups of people with bodily afflictions, or elders advanced in years such that they can no longer perform a craft and have no recourse except in taking—for what are they to do, die? This the Law did not impose. And you find that the case from which they adduced proof, by His saying, "She is like the merchant ships, from afar she brings her bread" (Prov 31:14), is about a man with an affliction who is unable to perform a craft; but where there is ability, the Law found no path to this.
, - $ - $ , . , , , , , , , , . .
Rav Yosef (peace be upon him) used to haul timber, and would say, "Great is labor, for it warms the one who does it" (cf. BT Gittin 67b)—meaning that, with the fatigue of his limbs in hauling the heavy timber, he would undoubtedly warm his body, and he commended this and rejoiced in it, and his soul was content with what was apportioned to him, by virtue of the excellence of contentment he possessed. I have heard the deluded ones cling to their saying, "He who wishes to derive benefit, let him derive benefit, like Elisha; and he who wishes not to derive benefit, let him not, like Samuel the Ramathite" (BT Berakhot 10b). But this does not resemble that in any way; rather this is, in my view, a deception on the part of the one who adduces it as proof, since it is clear and is no place for error. For Elisha did not accept money from people—let alone impose dues upon them and levy obligations upon them; God [forbid] him such a thing!—rather, he accepted hospitality only, such as that someone would host him while he was traveling on a journey, and he would lodge with him and eat that night or day and then go off to his affairs; whereas Samuel would enter no one's house and eat no one's food. And concerning the like of this the Sages said that if a disciple of the wise wishes to resemble this [Samuel], so as not to enter anyone's house, that is his right; and if he also lodges with someone out of the necessity of travel or the like, that too is his right—for they forbade eating without necessity and said, "Every disciple of the wise who frequently takes his meal in every place," and so on; and they said, "Every meal that is not for the sake of a commandment, it is forbidden for a disciple of the wise to derive benefit from it" (BT Pesaḥim 49a).
, , . , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . , , , , , , , , , , . .
And why should I prolong [discussion of] this subject? I will recount the case that was related and made clear in the Talmud, and the matter of one who contends against his own [interest]. There was a man who had a vineyard, and thieves had come upon it, so that whenever he inspected it each day he found his grapes diminished and lessened; and he had no doubt that one of the thieves had made it his target. He continued grieving over this throughout the days of the grape season, until he gathered what he gathered from it and spread it out until it dried and he collected the raisins. Now it is the custom of people, when they collect the spread-out [fruit], that some berries of figs and raisins fall, and it is permitted to eat them, since they are ownerless, their owners having abandoned them on account of their small quantity. Rabbi Tarfon happened to come one day to that vineyard, and he sat gathering some of those fallen raisins and eating them. The owner of the vineyard came and supposed that this was the one who had been stealing from him all year—he could not in fact identify him, but he had heard his name—so he rushed at him, seized him, overpowered him, put him in a sack, and ran carrying him on his back to throw him into the river. When Rabbi Tarfon saw himself perishing, he cried out, "Woe to you, Tarfon, for this man is killing you!" When the owner of the vineyard heard this, he let him go and fled, knowing that he had committed a grievous sin. And Rabbi Tarfon, for the rest of his life, would grieve and lament from that day over what had befallen him in saving his life through the honor of the Torah—for he was wealthy and able to have said to him, "Let me go and I will pay you such-and-such dinars," and to pay him without revealing to him that he was Tarfon, and to save his life by his wealth rather than by the Torah. They said: "All the days of that righteous man he was distressed over this matter, saying, 'Woe is me that I made use of the crown of the Torah, for whoever makes use of the crown of the Torah is uprooted from the world.'" They said on this: "Because Rabbi Tarfon was very wealthy, and he ought to have appeased him with money" (cf. BT Nedarim 62a). Our holy Rabbi (peace be upon him) opened his granaries of grain in a year of famine and said, "Let everyone who wishes to take his sustenance come and take his sustenance—on condition that he be a disciple of the wise." Rabbi Yonatan ben Amram came and stood before him, and he did not recognize him, and said to him, "Sustain me." He said to him, "In what aspect of learning do you stand?" He said to him, "Sustain me like the dog and like the raven"—meaning, even if I have no learning, then just as God sustains an unclean beast and an unclean bird, sustain me; for the ignoramus is no lower than these. So he gave to him, but afterward he regretted having been deceived by his speech, and said, "Woe is me that I let an ignoramus benefit from my goods." Those who had informed him of what had happened said to him, "Perhaps it was Yonatan ben Amram your disciple—he is the one who does not wish to benefit from the honor of the Torah in any way he can, even by a stratagem." He inquired and found the matter to be so (cf. BT Bava Batra 8a). These two accounts silence every disputant in this subject.
, , , , , , , . , , , " , .
The only thing the Law permitted to disciples of the wise is that they may give money to a person to trade with on their behalf at his own discretion, if he wishes; and the one who does this is rewarded for it. This is "filling the purse of disciples of the wise," and that their merchandise be sold first when goods are sold, and that they be given the first of the market by right. These are dues that God ordained for them, just as He ordained the priestly gifts for the priest and the tithes for the Levite, according to what the transmitted tradition brought—because these two practices, [trading and giving precedence,] are sometimes done by merchants among themselves by way of mutual courtesy, even where there is no learning [involved]; so the least is that a disciple of the wise be treated like an honored ignoramus. Likewise the Law exempted all disciples of the wise from the sovereign obligations—the imposts, the [provision of] hospitality, and the poll-taxes levied upon the individual, which are called "head-money" (*kesef gulgolta*), which the community pays on their behalf—and from the building of walls and the like. Even if the disciple of the wise possessed extensive wealth, none of this is incumbent upon him. Our Rabbi Yosef ha-Levi (may the memory of the righteous be a blessing) issued a ruling to this effect for a man in al-Andalus who possessed gardens and vineyards worth thousands of dinars, ruling that the impost was waived for him on account of his being a disciple of the wise—even though the poorest of the Jews paid that impost—and this is a legal ruling, just as the Law exempted the priests from [paying] the half-shekel, as we explained in its place, and the like of that.
[]
Mishnah [8]
, , , .
The honor of the Torah is to honor its commands by manifesting eagerness in performing them, and to honor the scholars who bear it and the books in which it is recorded. Likewise the desecration of the Torah is in these three things.
[]
Mishnah [9]
, .
"His heart is coarse" indicates that he rushes to issue legal rulings and presumes to do so without fear and without hesitation.
[]
Mishnah [10]
, , .
The Law permits a person who is "expert for the many" (*mumḥeh la-rabbim*) to judge as a single judge, as we explained in Sanhedrin; yet that is a matter of Torah [law], whereas they prohibited it here by way of proper conduct, not by way of [outright] prohibition.
, .
And he said: if your colleagues differ from you in an opinion, do not compel them to accept the soundness of your own reasoning, for they are at liberty to accept your view or not, whereas you are not at liberty to compel them to your view.
[]
Mishnah [11]
, .
He says: the one who studies the Torah while in a state of poverty and want, yet despite this exerts his soul and studies—he will eventually study in a state of ease and from [a position of having] nothing to distract him from study.
, .
But the one who neglects study on account of his abundant wealth, occupying himself with eating and drinking and comforts, God will eventually make him poor and straiten his circumstances, until his neglect of study becomes [a matter of] occupying himself with [earning] bread to eat.
[]
Mishnah [12]
, , .
He said: make light of trade and persevere over the Torah, and be humble before every person—meaning, you should not be "lowly of spirit" before the great alone, but before every person, so that when you sit with anyone at all, you sit and your speech to him and your association with him are as though he were of greater rank than you.
.
All of this is [a matter of moving] far from haughtiness, as we explained.
, , .
And the meaning of "there are many idle ones against you" is that there are many idle pursuits that require someone to be occupied with them; so if you do not occupy yourself with the Torah, it will occupy you in one of those pursuits.
[]
Mishnah [13]
, . , .
A *peraqlit* is the person who mediates for someone before the sovereign, a mediation of benefit, and intercedes on his behalf. A *qatigor* is the opposite of that—the one who slanders the person before the sovereign and seeks his ruin.
, , .
And he said that repentance after evil deeds, or good deeds from the outset—each of these two conditions wards off the descent of calamities and misfortunes upon a person.
[]
Mishnah [17]
, , , .
These are three great virtues bestowed upon the nation in the foundation of the Law, namely the priesthood, the kingship, and the Torah. The priesthood Aaron acquired; the kingship David acquired; and the crown of Torah lies ready for everyone who wishes to be crowned with it.
, .
They said: perhaps you will say that this crown is inferior to the [other] two—rather, it is greater than both, and through it the [other] two come to be: "By me kings reign and by me princes rule" (Prov 8:15–16).
, .
As for the crown of a good name, that is obtained through the Torah—I mean its knowledge and the practice of it—for through that the true good name comes about.
[]
Mishnah [18]
, . .
He says: seek out the place of instruction, for in the company of others knowledge becomes sound and established for you. Do not rely upon your own understanding and suppose that you are independent of companions—for the disciples stimulate you.
[]
Mishnah [20]
, .
He says that a person's being a disciple to one more learned than himself is preferable and better for him than his being a teacher to one beneath him—because in the first case he increases and in the second he diminishes.
.
And you know from what we explained in Sanhedrin that they established, upon the principle of "raising up in matters of holiness," [that] the head of a court of twenty-three is to be the last of the seventy-one of the Great Sanhedrin, and they held that they had thereby raised him a degree.
[]
Mishnah [21]
, , , .
A *teraqlin* is the palace, and a *prozdor* is the vestibule.
, , .
The parable is clear and its purpose evident: that in this world one acquires the virtues by which a person merits the life of the world to come, and this [world] is only a road and a passageway to that.
[]
Mishnah [22]
, .
We have explained in the tenth [chapter] of Sanhedrin that there is no perfection nor increase after death; rather, a person is perfected and increases in degrees in this world.
.
To this Solomon points in his saying, "for there is no deed, nor reckoning, nor knowledge, nor wisdom in Sheol, to which you are going" (Eccl 9:10).
.
Rather, in the condition in which a person departs, so he remains forever.
, .
Therefore one ought to strive during this brief and meager span, and not let it be lost except in acquisition alone—for its loss is grievous, since there is no compensation for it and no possibility of repair once it is gone.
, , .
Because the virtuous knew this, they did not consider squandering it on anything but knowledge and increase, and they truly profited from all their time; they expended of it on bodily matters only the briefest while, and on what is indispensable.
, , .
Others turned away from it altogether, [occupying themselves] with bodily matters alone, and departed from it just as they entered—"as he came, so shall he go" (Eccl 5:15)—and so they suffered an everlasting loss.
, , , .
The common people, all of them, invert the truth in this question and say of the first group that they lost the world, and of the latter group that they profited the world—but the matter is the reverse, as we have described: "[they put] darkness for light and light for darkness" (Isa 5:20). Woe to those who, in truth, suffer the loss!
, , .
This is the very theme that Solomon took as a principle in Ecclesiastes, in his praise of profiting the world [to come] and his censure of losing it, and his declaration that there is no profit nor possibility, after death, of [acquiring] the thing that escapes you here. All of this is correct; and if you consider that book with this consideration, the truth will become clear to you.
[]
Mishnah [23]
, .
This is clear. They are matters of proper conduct, concerning the refinement of social intercourse and the placing of speech in its beneficial setting.
[]
Mishnah [24]
.
Even though it was Solomon who uttered this admonition, this Sage [Shmuel ha-Katan] used to discipline himself by this trait and warn against this transgression.
[]
Mishnah [25]
, , .
He says that learning in youth becomes established and is not easily forgotten, whereas the matter of learning in old age is the reverse; and this is clear and observable.
[]
Mishnah [26]
, .
Rabbi Yosei says that the learning of the young contains doubts and problems not yet resolved and not free of objections, because not enough time has passed for them to repeat their knowledge and dispel its doubts.
, , .
And Rabbi [Yehudah ha-Nasi] said: do not regard the wine by its vessel, for there may be a new vessel containing old wine, and an old vessel that is empty, with nothing in it.
, , .
So too there may be young men whose questions and knowledge are pure, unmuddied by confusion—like old wine whose dregs and lees have been separated out—while there are old men who have no knowledge at all; so how much more so [is it possible] that they should have muddled, confused knowledge.
[]
Mishnah [27]
, , .
He says that envy, lust, and love of honor drive a person out of the world a loser—because with these traits, or any one of them, the corruption of religion is inevitable, and neither rational virtues nor moral virtues will be attained.
[]
Mishnah [28]
, , , , .
His saying "to know, and to make known, and to be made known" (M. Avot 4:28) he intends thereby: that the ones who are born, and the ones who are now born and [then] die, and the ones who live after death may know—so that the knowledge may encompass these three classes—"for He is the Fashioner and He is the Creator."
, , .
And his saying "and He is the Judge and He is destined to judge" he intends thereby that He is the one who now rules over all with life and death and with the rest of the affairs of this world, and He is also the one who will judge those who live in the hereafter with reward and punishment.
And his saying "and there is no taking of a bribe"—as [we have explained].