[Avodah] Talmid Torah

[Chana Luntz]

I sent the post below to areivim, having finally caught up on my
areivim's but not my avodahs - and having now caught up on avodah as
well, I see that it has transferred to avodah.  While the avodah
discussion has gone off in a slightly different direction, I think the
point below remains valid

RSBA wrote:

> From: "Avi Burstein" <aburstein at gmail.com>
> >> Shouldn't young men also be required to be involved with chesed?
> --
> > As we say every morning...'vetalmud Torah keneged kulom..." Girls
> > don't have such a chiyuv.
> ---
> This is so wrong I am stunned someone would actually propose it.
> ----
> 
> You should've been around 2000 years ago - when it was written..
>

I may have missed it, but I haven't seen anybody on here articulate
precisely why "this is so wrong I am stunned someone should actually
propose it" and I think it is important that somebody does so.  The
quote comes from the Mishna in Peah which we recite every morning, and
indeed, it commences by describing various mitzvos that could be
classified under the heading of chessed "peah, bikurim" as well as
gimilus chassadim and ends vetalmud torah keneged kulom.  However, it
also includes in the list, "iyun tephila" (as well as haknasas kala and
halvias hameis). 

The reason I think it is important to articulate this is because there
has always been a tendency for those engaged in Torah to be tempted to
say "oh well, that means I don't need to daven" or "Oh well, that means
I don't need to engage in chessed mitzvos such as being mesameach chatan
v'kala or accompanying a meis" because I am engaged in talmid torah.
After all, talmid torah keneged kulom.  But, as I hope you all know,
this is not the way we pasken (do I need to bring all the sources for
this?, the gemora deals with these points explictly.)  Hence I would
second the statement that "this is so wrong" before anybody gets any
ideas.

So once we have established that there are various mitzvos that fall
under the rubric of gimilus chassadim that require men to be doche
talmid torah, and we are dealing more with the grey area as to what
mitzvos a man should choose to seek out with what might perhaps be
called his discretionary time - we can further see the value of a man
engaging in gimilus chassadim from eg Rosh Hashana 18a - where there is
a discussion about the men of the house of Eli, where Hashem swore an
oath that they would die at a young age, and this sin could not be
atoned for by the bringing of korbanos.  And Rava says while the pasuk
states that the sin cannot be atoned for by way of korbanos, it can be
atoned for b'torah, and Abaye explains the pasuk, that while the sin of
the house of Eli cannot be atoned for by way of korbanos, it can be
atoned for b'tora v'gimilus chassadim.  And then the gemora goes on to
explain that both Rava and Abaye were from the house of Eli, and that
Rava engaged in Torah only, and lived until 40 and Abaye engaged in both
torah and gimilus chassadim and lived until 60.  Now the next piece in
the gemora describes another family from the house of Eli whose sons
were all dying at the age of 18 (until they followed R' Yochanan's
advice to engage in Torah) so it would seem that Rava bought himself an
extra 22 years via Torah only, and that Abaye bought himself a further
20 years over and above that 22 years by way of the gimilus chassadim.

And since it must be uncontestable that when it says that Abaye engaged
in gimilus chassadim and Rava did not, it did not mean that Rava went
against the halachas regarding being mesameach chatan v'kala or going to
a levaya over and above torah study.  So Abaye must have been using some
of his other time, time that Rava was using to engage in talmid torah,
to do what might be considered discretionary gilimus chassadim.  Hence
it would seem, despite the general rules about poskening like Rava over
Abaye ((except in limited circumstances) one rather has to conclude that
Hashem poskened like Abaye in this case and that the gemora brought the
story and the ages until which they lived to make that clear (despite
any lo b'shamayim he objections).
 
> >> But it does explain a lot.
> 
> BH for that. That's what I was trying to do, Ie, explain why
> girls are more involved in Chesed projects than boys. 
> Girls do not have a chiyuv of 'vehogiso bo yomom volaylo', 
> while boys do.
> 
> (I am NOT, repeat NOT, saying that boys may not or should not
> be doing chesed.)
> 
> SBA


Regards

Chana