MISHNA: Anyone who is engaged in the study of Bible, and in the study of Mishna, and in the desired mode of behavior, i.e., he performs labor and generally acts in an appropriate manner, will not be quick to sin, as it is stated: “And a threefold cord is not quickly broken” (Ecclesiastes 4:12). One who is involved in all three of these activities will not sin easily. And anyone who does not engage in the study of Bible, nor the study of Mishna, nor the desired mode of behavior, is not part of society, i.e., he is not considered a civilized person at all.

In connection to the mishna’s statement about the importance of Torah study, the Gemara relates the following incident: And there already was an incident in which Rabbi Tarfon and the Elders were reclining in the loft of the house of Nit’za in Lod, when this question was asked of them: Is study greater or is action greater? Rabbi Tarfon answered and said: Action is greater. Rabbi Akiva answered and said: Study is greater. Everyone answered and said: Study is greater, but not as an independent value; rather, it is greater as study leads to action.

It is taught in a baraita that Rabbi Yosei says: Torah study is greater, as it preceded the mitzva of separating ḥalla by forty years. The Torah was given to the Jewish people soon after they left Egypt, whereas the mitzva of separating ḥalla came into effect only after they entered Eretz Yisrael. And it preceded the mitzva of terumot and tithes by fifty-four years, as the Jews become obligated in these mitzvot only fourteen years after they entered Eretz Yisrael, once they had conquered and divided the land. Furthermore, the Torah preceded the observance of Sabbatical Years by sixty-one years, as they began to count the seven-year cycle only once they had divided the land. Finally, it preceded the Jubilee Years by 103 years, as the fifty-year count to the first Jubilee Year began only after they had divided Eretz Yisrael.

And just as study comes before action, i.e., the mitzva of Torah study takes precedence over other mitzvot, so too, the judgment concerning Torah study precedes the judgment for an action of the performance of a mitzva. This is in accordance with the statement of Rav Hamnuna, as Rav Hamnuna says: The beginning of a person’s judgment is only concerning matters of Torah, as it is stated: “The beginning of judgment is as one lets out water” (Proverbs 17:14). This is understood to refer to the sin of neglecting Torah, as the Torah is compared to water, which brings life to the world.

And just as the judgment concerning Torah study precedes the judgment for an action of the performance of a mitzva, so too does the reward for Torah study precede the reward for an action of the performance of a mitzva, as it is stated: “And He gave them the lands of nations, and they took the labor of peoples in possession, that they might observe His statutes and protect His laws” (Psalms 105:44–45). The first reward is for observing the statutes, and as explained on 37a, this is a reference to Torah study.

§ The mishna teaches that anyone who does not engage in the study of Bible, nor the study of Mishna, nor the desired mode of behavior, is not part of society. Rabbi Yoḥanan says: And he is disqualified from bearing witness, as this individual cannot be trusted. The Sages taught: One who eats in the marketplace is comparable to a dog, as he disrespects himself through his lack of embarrassment over eating in public. And some say he is even disqualified from bearing witness. Rabbi Idi bar Avin said: The halakha is in accordance with the opinion cited in the name of: Some say.

Rabba bar bar Ḥana said: I was once walking together with Rabbi Yoḥanan to ask him about this statement. Whenever he would enter a lavatory, upon his exit I would ask him to explain a matter, and he would not answer us until he had washed his hands and donned his phylacteries and made the blessing, and only then would he answer us. With regard to the honor given to King Hezekiah, he said: Nowadays, we even say: This one fulfilled that which is written in this, but we do not say: He taught that which is written in this, which was a unique honor performed at the burial of the righteous King Hezekiah.

MISHNA: Anyone who is engaged in the study of Bible, and in the study of Mishna, and in the desired mode of behavior, i.e., he performs labor and generally acts in an appropriate manner, will not be quick to sin, as it is stated: “And a threefold cord is not quickly broken” (Ecclesiastes 4:12). One who is involved in all three of these activities will not sin easily. And anyone who does not engage in the study of Bible, nor the study of Mishna, nor the desired mode of behavior, is not part of society, i.e., he is not considered a civilized person at all.

But didn't they [also] do this before Ahab? R’ Y’hudoh said that the honor accorded Hizkiyah was the massive size of his funeral – thirty six thousand people who bared their shoulders. R' Neḥemya disagrees with this interpretation of the ‘honor’, because we find that even Achov who was a wicked king had a very large funeral. The verse cannot mean that the ‘honor’ of Hizkiyah is a massive funeral, if we find that even the wicked Achov had a very large funeral. But where do we find that Achov had a very large funeral? It is certainly not mentioned in the N’vee’im. Says Tosafot: That they made a massive eulogy for him, Achov, as the Gemara says in M’giloh (3a): The prophet Zechariah 12, 11, speaks of the eulogy of Hadrimon son of Tavrimon. On the surface the verse is extremely difficult to understand, there is no such known person in Tanach. The Targum there clarifies the matter. The verse means: like the eulogy of Achov ben Omree who was killed by Hadrimon ben Tavrimon. And that occurred during a battle when there were many people, and they all eulogized him. This is the source for the large funeral of Achov that R' Neḥemya referred to.But the verse in M’lochim seems to contradict the Targum, which says that the people eulogized Achov and seemingly mourned his death. And even though it is written about the death of Achov (M’lochim 1, 22, 36) and the ‘joy’ went through the encampment, and the Gemara says (Sanhedrin 39b) as an explanation of the use of the word רנה, With the destruction of the wicked comes joy (Mishlay 11, 10), with the loss of Achov ben Omree there was joy. It is clear from the Gemara’s understanding of the verse in M’lochim that there was joy, not mourning, at the death of Achov.That was for the righteous of the generation, but his servants and those who loved him, were eulogizing him. Both are true. There was a massive eulogy for him by his servants and admirers. There was also profound joy for the righteous who saw in his death a victory over evil.

Rather, that they laid a Torah scroll upon his bier. Rather, says R' Neḥemya, the ‘honor’ accorded Hizkiyah was that they placed a Torah scroll on his bier.In Masechet Moaid Koton 25a the Gemara relates that when Rav Huno passed away, they contemplated placing a Torah scroll on his bier. Rav Chisdo objected. His argument was that Rav Huno held that it is forbidden to sit on a bed where a Torah scroll is resting. If so, why should we do for him in death that which he held was forbidden while alive?Even though we find in the last Perek of Mo’aid Koton (25a) about Rav Huno, for whom they contemplated placing a Torah scroll on his bier, and it is to be understood from the Gemara there that it is forbidden to do so, place a Torah scroll on a bier, because it is forbidden to sit on a bed that has a Torah scroll resting on it.There is another Gemara in M’nochos 32b where it seems that R' Neḥemya’s explanation of Hizkiyah’s ‘honor’ is relevant, but the Gemara there ignores it.And in HaKomaitz Rabbah (M’nochos 32b) there is a dispute of amoraim, Rav Huno holds that it is forbidden to sit on a bed that has a Torah scroll resting on it and R’ Yochanan permits it, we cannot challenge Rav Huno who holds that it is forbidden from R’ N‘chemyoh who says here that they put a Torah scroll on Hizkiyah’s bier, because Hizkiyah is different since he was extremely great in Torah and good deeds. Even though for somebody of Rav Huno’s stature it may be forbidden, for Hizkiyah who was so righteous it is permitted, because he personified the ultimate Torah leader more so than others and is entitled to have the honor of a Torah scroll placed on his bier.

But didn't the Master say: Torah study is great because [it] leads to performance [of the mitzvoth]? R’ Yochanan ruled that we may place a Torah scroll on the bier of a righteous person and announce that he fulfilled all that is written in the Torah, but we may not say that he taught all that is written in the Torah. It seems that fulfilling all that is written in the Torah is less of an accomplishment than teaching all that is written in the Torah. We may accord a righteous person the lesser honor of saying that he fulfilled, but not the greater honor that he taught all of the Torah. That honor is reserved for the righteous of Hizkiyah’s caliber.The Gemara challenges this by asking: But the master taught that learning Torah is great because it leads one to performing the mitzvos of the Torah? What exact point is the Gemara trying to make by citing the teaching that Torah study is great because it leads to performance of the mitzvos?Tosafot cites Rashi’s explanation, argues with it and eventually introduces his own explanation.Rashi explains: We see that performance of the mitzvos is greater, because we are saying that the greatness of studying the Torah is that it leads one to fulfilling the Torah, obviously fulfilling must be the greater of the two. This is a contradiction to R’ Yochanan who said that we may say about a righteous person that he fulfilled the Torah but not that he taught the Torah. R’ Yochanan is saying that announcing that one taught is the greater honor, while we have learned that fulfilling the Torah is the greater of the two. Rabbeinu Tam finds this difficult: to the contrary, from this statement, the Gemara deduces in the end of the first Perek of Kidushin (40b) that learning Torah is greater than the performance of Mitzvos.In regard to the elders who were reclined in the attic of the house of Nitzoh in Lod, and the this question was raised before them: Is studying Torah greater or performance of Mitzvos greater?They were all counted and said: studying is greater because it leads one to performance. It seems that the Gemara there is clearly saying that studying Torah is greater. If so, what is the Gemara’s question here to R’ Yochanan who is also saying that announcing that one studied the entire Torah is the greater honor.Rabbeinu Tam adopts a new approach to our Gemara. The Gemara at this point is not addressing the issue of whether studying is greater than performance, it is addressing the essence of R’ Yochanan’s statement that we may say that a righteous person fulfilled all of the Torah, but not that he studied all of the Torah. And Rabbeinu Tam says: that this is the explanation of our Gemara: but the Master said that it is studying that leads one to fulfilling, and when we say that he fulfilled the Torah, we are in effect saying that he learned all of the Torah, for if he did not learn, how could he fulfill the Torah, for it is the learning of Torah that leads one to fulfilling the Torah? Without learning how to perform the Mitzvos one cannot fulfill them.It did not enter upon the mind of the Gemara at this time to differentiate between studying Torah and teaching Torah.And the Gemara answers: that this statement of R’ Yochanan is speaking about teaching others, this we can certainly not say about any deceased righteous person, because that is certainly the strongest praise that one can possibly say about a person because he leads the multitudes to fulfilling the Torah when he teaches them. This level of praise is reserved for Hizkiyah and may not be said about other righteous people. The Gemara was correct in its understanding that saying that one fulfilled all of the Torah is equivalent to saying that he learned all of the Torah, for if he did not learn how could he fulfill? R’ Yochanan did not say that we cannot announce that a person learned all of the Torah. What he said is that we may not announce that he taught others all of the Torah. This praise is reserved only for those of Hizkiyah’s caliber.According to Rabbeinu Tam and Rashi the greatest praise that could possibly be said about a person is that he taught others all of the Torah. This is reserved for Hizkiyah and others of his caliber. We may say that a person studied and fulfilled all of the Torah. Tosafot will now present the opinion of Sh’iltos of Rav Achai who has a radically different approach to our Gemara. His approach is based on a variant text.According to the text of our Gemara, Rabbah bar Bar Chonoh asked R’ Yochanan about the issue that was discussed in our Gemara; is it so that we may not say that a righteous person fulfilled all of the Torah? R’ Yochanan’s response was directly about this issue and he answered that we may announce that a person fulfilled all of the Torah, but we may not announce that he taught all of the Torah.According to the text of Shiltos Rabbah bar Bar Chonoh asked nothing about this issue, nor did R’ Yochanan say anything about it. The Gemara is analyzing R’ Yochanan’s behavior when faced with this dilemma. He was asked about a passage of Gemara while he needed to put on his t’filin. How did R’ Yochanan act? In the Sh’iltos of Rav Achai Gaon, we do not have the text that R’ Yochanan responded we may say that he performed the Mitzvos but not that he taught. This issue was not raised at all. When Rabbah bar Bar Chonoh says that he was asking R’ Yochanan about a teaching, he was not referring to this issue at all. He was speaking about learning in general. He is saying that when I asked R’ Yochanan a question about what I was studying, this is how he behaved.Rather, the text is: and he, R’ Yochanan, put on his T’filin and then told us the answer to our question and nothing more is in the text of the Gemara. There is no reference to the issue of what may be announced at a righteous person’s funeral.And the Gemara asks: How did he put on t’filin first before he told them the teaching that they had asked him about? But study is greater than fulfilling and he should have taught them the Gemara that they needed to know, which is Torah study, before he put on his t’filin, which is performance of mitzvos, because studying takes precedence?And the Gemara answers: This is speaking about learning and that is speaking about teaching. For learning oneself, study is greater because it leads one to fulfilling, but teaching others is not as vital and it is for this reason that he put on t’filin first before teaching Rabbah bar Bar Chonoh what he needed to know.There is a radical difference between Rashi and Rabbeinu Tam who both hold that the greatest honor that can be accorded to a person is to announce that he taught Torah to others and Sh’iltos who holds that teaching others is not as important as learning oneself. We will return to you Arbo’oh Ovos!

But didn't they [also] do this before Ahab? R’ Y’hudoh said that the honor accorded Hizkiyah was the massive size of his funeral – thirty six thousand people who bared their shoulders. R' Neḥemya disagrees with this interpretation of the ‘honor’, because we find that even Achov who was a wicked king had a very large funeral. The verse cannot mean that the ‘honor’ of Hizkiyah is a massive funeral, if we find that even the wicked Achov had a very large funeral. But where do we find that Achov had a very large funeral? It is certainly not mentioned in the N’vee’im. Says Tosafot: That they made a massive eulogy for him, Achov, as the Gemara says in M’giloh (3a): The prophet Zechariah 12, 11, speaks of the eulogy of Hadrimon son of Tavrimon. On the surface the verse is extremely difficult to understand, there is no such known person in Tanach. The Targum there clarifies the matter. The verse means: like the eulogy of Achov ben Omree who was killed by Hadrimon ben Tavrimon. And that occurred during a battle when there were many people, and they all eulogized him. This is the source for the large funeral of Achov that R' Neḥemya referred to.But the verse in M’lochim seems to contradict the Targum, which says that the people eulogized Achov and seemingly mourned his death. And even though it is written about the death of Achov (M’lochim 1, 22, 36) and the ‘joy’ went through the encampment, and the Gemara says (Sanhedrin 39b) as an explanation of the use of the word רנה, With the destruction of the wicked comes joy (Mishlay 11, 10), with the loss of Achov ben Omree there was joy. It is clear from the Gemara’s understanding of the verse in M’lochim that there was joy, not mourning, at the death of Achov.That was for the righteous of the generation, but his servants and those who loved him, were eulogizing him. Both are true. There was a massive eulogy for him by his servants and admirers. There was also profound joy for the righteous who saw in his death a victory over evil.

None of the other mitzvot can be equated to the study of Torah. Rather, the study of Torah can be equated to all the mitzvot, because study leads to deed. Therefore, study takes precedence over deed in all cases.

None of the other mitzvot can be equated to the study of Torah. Rather, the study of Torah can be equated to all the mitzvot, because study leads to deed. Therefore, study takes precedence over deed in all cases.

Rabbi Joshua ben Levi said: every day a bat kol (a heavenly voice) goes forth from Mount Horeb and makes proclamation and says: “Woe unto humankind for their contempt towards the Torah”, for whoever does not occupy himself with the study of Torah is called, nazuf (the rebuked. As it is said, “Like a gold ring in the snout of a pig is a beautiful woman bereft of sense” (Proverbs 11:22). And it says, “And the tablets were the work of God, and the writing was the writing of God, graven upon the tablets” (Exodus 32:16). Read not haruth [‘graven’] but heruth [‘freedom’]. For there is no free man but one that occupies himself with the study of the Torah. And whoever regularly occupies himself with the study of the Torah he is surely exalted, as it is said, “And from Mattanah to Nahaliel; and Nahaliel to Bamoth” (Numbers 21:19).

Incidental to the verse, “Tremble, and do not sin,” the Gemara mentions that Rabbi Levi bar Ḥama said that Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish said: One should always incite his good inclination against his evil inclination, i.e., that one must constantly struggle so that his evil inclination does not lead him to transgression, as it is stated: "Tremble, and do not sin."If one succeeds and subdues his evil inclination, excellent, but if he does not succeed in subduing it, he should study Torah, as alluded to in the verse: “Say to your heart.” If he subdues his evil inclination, excellent; if not, he should recite Shema, which contains the acceptance of the yoke of God, and the concept of reward and punishment, as it is stated in the verse: “Upon your bed,” which alludes to Shema, where it says: “When you lie down.” If he subdues his evil inclination, excellent; if not, he should remind himself of the day of death, whose silence is alluded to in the continuation of the verse: “And be still, Selah.”

One interrupts his Torah study to carry out the dead for burial and to escort a bride to her wedding. They said about Rabbi Yehuda, son of Rabbi Elai, that he would interrupt his Torah study to carry out the dead for burial and to escort a bride to her wedding. The Gemara qualifies this ruling: In what case is this statement said? Only where there are not sufficient numbers of other people available to perform these mitzvot and honor the deceased or the bride appropriately. However, when there are sufficient numbers, additional people should not interrupt their Torah study to participate.

The two scholars, Rabbi Yonatan ben Asmai and Rabbi Yehuda, son of converts, once again sat and raised the following dilemma: In one place it is written in praise of the Torah: “She is more precious than rubies; and all of your desires are not to be compared to her” (Proverbs 3:15). One can infer from here that all human desires cannot be compared to the Torah, but the desires of Heaven, i.e., mitzvot, can indeed be compared to her. And elsewhere it is written: “For wisdom is better than rubies; and all the things that may be desired are not to be compared to it” (Proverbs 8:11), which indicates that even mitzvot cannot be compared to the Torah.

h study and in acts of charity, and I engaged in Torah study alone. The Gemara comments: And this is in accordance with a statement of Rav Huna, as Rav Huna says: Anyone who occupies himself w

. Rabbi Ḥanina ben Teradyon said to him: Fortunate are you, as you were arrested on five charges but you will be saved; woe is me, as I have been arrested on one charge, but I will not be saved. You will be saved because you engaged in Torah study and in acts of charity, and I engaged in Torah study alone. The Gemara comments: And this is in accordance with a statement of Rav Huna, as Rav Huna says: Anyone who occupies himself with Torah study alone is considered like one who does not have a God. As it is stated: “Now for long seasons Israel was without the true God, and without a teaching priest, and without the Torah” (II Chronicles 15:3). What is meant by “without the true God”? This teaches that anyone who engages in Torah study alone is considered like one who does not have a true God.

Do not seek greatness for yourself, and do not covet honor. Practice more than you learn. Do not yearn for the table of kings, for your table is greater than their table, and your crown is greater than their crown, and faithful is your employer to pay you the reward of your labor.

Rabbi Hanina ben Dosa said: anyone whose fear of sin precedes his wisdom, his wisdom is enduring, but anyone whose wisdom precedes his fear of sin, his wisdom is not enduring. He [also] used to say: anyone whose deeds exceed his wisdom, his wisdom is enduring, but anyone whose wisdom exceeds his deeds, his wisdom is not enduring.

2. We cancel Torah learning to hear the megillah, all the more so for the rest of the mitzvot of the Torah, that all of them are pushed aside because of the reading of the megillah, for there isn't anything that pushes aside megillah reading, except for an unclaimed dead body that does not have anyone to bury it (according to its need), in that the one who happens upon it buries it first and afterwards reads [the megillah]. RAMA: And all of this is only dealing with [a situation] in which one is able to do the two of them. But if it is impossible to do the two of them, there is no Torah mitzvah that is pushed aside because of megillah reading (Ran and Beit Yosef in the name of the Tosafot and Mehar''a Mizrachi). And the fact that an unclaimed dead body comes first, this is specifically when it is possible for him to read afterwards (Mehar''a Mizrachi).