Rabbi Akiva says Even one who reads foreign Seforim (has no share in the world to come).: He refers to Sifrei Tzedukim.
(c) (Rav Yosef): It is also forbidden to read Sefer Ben Sira (due to Bitul Torah, for it contains worthless things).
(d) Question (Abaye): What do you object to?
1. Suggestion: It says 'do not take the skin off a fish, even from the ear. Rather, roast it with the skin, and it will serve like relish for two loaves.'
2. Rejection: (This is a proper teaching!) If we understand it simply, this is like the Torah says "Lo Sashchis (do not needlessly destroy)"!
i. The deeper meaning teaches proper conduct, i.e. do not have abnormal Bi'ah.
(e) Answer #1: It says 'A daughter is a vain treasure to her father. He cannot sleep, because he always worries about her:
1. When she is a minor, he fears lest she be seduced. When she is a Na'arah, he fears lest she be Mezanah;
2. When she is a Bogeres, he fears lest she not get married. When she is married, he fears lest she be barren. When she is old, he fears lest she do Kishuf.'
(f) Rejection: Chachamim taught similarly!
1. (Beraisa): The world needs males and females, but fortunate is one who has sons, and woe to one who has daughters.
(g) Answer #2: It says 'do not put worry in your heart, for worry kills the strongest men.'
(h) Rejection: Also Shlomo taught "De'agah v'Lev Ish Yashchenah"!
1. (R. Ami or R. Asi): He should be Mesi'ach (remove) it from his mind;
2. (The other of R. Ami and R. Asi): Yasichenah (he should discuss it) with others.
(i) Answer #3: It says 'keep the masses from your house. Do not bring everyone in.'
(j) Rejection: Rebbi said similarly!
1. (Beraisa - Rebbi): A man should not have too many friends in his house - "Ish Re'im Lehisro'ei'a."
(k) Answer #4: It says 'if a man's beard is fine and weak, he is a Chacham. If it is thick, he is a fool. One who blows the foam in his cup is not thirsty. One who ponders what to put on his bread, remove his bread (for he is not truly hungry). One who has a part in his beard, he is the greatest schemer.
(l) (Rav Yosef): We may expound proper teachings of the Sefer:
1. A good wife is a good gift. Hash-m gives her to one who fears Him;
2. An evil wife is like Tzara'as to her husband. His cure is to divorce her;
3. The husband of a pretty wife is so fortunate, it is as if his days are doubled (Rashi; Maharsha - the husband of a virtuous wife is fortunate. He will live in this world and the next);
4. Shun your eyes from an attractive wife (of another man), lest you be snared (the Yetzer ha'Ra gives her grace in men's eyes). Do not drink with her husband, for many have been corrupted (in this world) by a beautiful woman, multitudes have received Gehinom due to her (Maharsha).
5. Peddlers (of women's accessories) cause great damage. They incite the Yetzer for Arayos like a spark ignites a coal. Their houses are full (with their deadly wares) like a chicken coop (Ramah);
6. Keep the masses from your house. Do not bring everyone in. Cause that many will desire your Shalom, and even among these, reveal your secrets to only one out of a thousand. Guard your words even from your wife.
7. Do not worry about tomorrow "Ki Lo Seda Mah Yeled Yom" - perhaps you will not be alive tomorrow. Why worry about a world you have no part in?!
Rav Yosef Says even the book of Ben Sira- Because it has regular words through which one comes to bitul torah.
ר"ע אומר אף הקורא בספרים החיצונים תנא בספרים שפירשו התורה נביאים וכתובים ע"פ דעתם ולא סמכו על מדרש חכמים כי בדבריהם צד מינות וכ"מ שפקרו המינים אמרו חכמים תשובתן בצידן ואפילו דברי חכמים אסור לקרותם רב יוסף אמר אף ספר בן סירא נמי כספרי מינים דמי משום דכתיב בו דברים של הבל שאין בהם צורך
RIF Sanhedrin 19b
Rabbi Akiva said even if one read in the Sefarim Chitzoniyim, which is taught as the books that explain a lot of Torah, Neviim and Ketuvim according to their own opinions and they did not rely upon the midrash of the sages because in their own words is a little bit of heresy. And in any place that the heretics uprooted the traditions, the sages forbade the use of those works even where there could be some positive use. Even if written by a big scholar, it is still forbidden to read it. Rav Yosef says even the book of Ben Sira is like the books of the heretics since it has within it matters that are worthless that have no purpose.
(ד)הגה: וי"א שבתלמוד בבלי שהוא בלול במקרא במשנה וגמרא אדם יוצא ידי חובתו בשביל הכל (טור בשם ר"ת וע"פ ע"ל סי' רמ"ה ס"ו) ואין לאדם ללמוד כי אם מקרא משנה וגמרא והפוסקים הנמשכים אחריהם ובזה יקנה העולם הזה והעוה"ב אבל לא בלמוד שאר החכמות (ריב"ש סי' מ"ה ותלמידי רשב"א) ומ"מ מותר ללמוד באקראי בשאר חכמות ובלבד שלא יהיו ספרי מינים וזהו נקרא בין החכמים טיול בפרדס ואין לאדם לטייל בפרדס רק לאחר שמלא כריסו בשר ויין והוא לידע איסור והיתר ודיני המצות (רמב"ם סוף מדע ס"פ ד' מהל' יסודי התורה):
There are those who say that in the Talmud Bavli which is full of Pesukim, mishna and gemara, an individual fulfills his requirement to learn everything! But it is not for a person to learn anything but Torah, Mishna and Gemara and the halachic decisors that come after them and through this they will acquire ththis world and the world to come. But not with learning any other wisdoms. In any case, it is permitted to learn through happenstance all other knowledge as long as it isn't a book of heresy.
"If we understand these sentences ... aright, then the sentence which stands at their head ‘make them the primary [focus] and not subsidiary’ forewarns one not to take the following sentences to mean that one is completely to ignore and remain in ignorance of all knowledge and science which has been gained and nurtured by non-Jewish sources or which have no direct bearing on the knowledge to be gained by the study of the Torah. Inasmuch as what is commanded is ‘make them the primary [focus] and not subsidiary’ the permission to occupy oneself also with other spheres of knowledge is assumed. Only, the knowledge of Torah and the understanding we derive from it is to be our principle concern and to be regarded as having been given to us as the absolute and firmly established Truth. Only as accessory knowledge and in so far as they serve to truly help the study of the Torah and are subordinated as the ‘tofel’ to the ‘ikar’, are they to be studied. But the Torah and all its teachings must ... be the yardstick by which we measure the results obtained by other spheres of learning. Only that which is in accordance with the truths of the Torah can remain true for us. All that we accept intellectually .... must always be considered from the point of view of the Torah and must be within the lines of the doctrines it teaches so that we .... do not adulterate the knowledge we draw out of the Torah with ideas which have developed from other and strange premises. We are not to consider Torah as being the same as other knowledge, so that the Torah is for us only another branch of all other knowledge.
איסור לבטל מלימוד התורה לעסוק בלימודי חול
בע"ה מל"כ ידידינו וחברים בדעה ובהעבודה להרביץ תורה בישראל גם במדינה זו שהיתה רפויה בלמוד התורה, ה"ה ראשי המתיבתות והמנהלים להגדיל תורה ולהאדירה עד ביאת הגואל במהרה שלמכון יסגא.
הנה ידוע לעולם התורה מה שדברתי הרבה פעמים לפני בני התורה בענין למודי חול אשר לבני תורה
וגם לבני הישיבות הקדושות אשר ראוין להתגדל שם בתורה וביראת ה' טהורה הרי עצם למודי חול אף כשליכא למודי כפירה וגם לא תערובות נשים, הוא איסור דמניחין עולם שהוא איסור אף לאחר שנתגדלו
בתורה במדרגה גדולה,עיין בתענית דף כ"א ע"א בעובדא דר' יוחנן ואילפא מתרי מלאכי השרת עה'"ש, ואף שהיה שם
לזמן קצר ולהכרח פרנסתו שהיו עניים גדולים להחיות עצמן ובני ביתם שמטעם זה לא נענש אילפא, אבל לבחורים ואברכים צעירים שעדיין לא למדו כל הצורך ובזה שיכניסו עצמן ללמודי חול הוי לא שייך שיגיעו למדרגת ת"ח שיודע התורה בדורה"ז דצריך לזה כל כחות הנפש שחננו השי"ת בדעת ובהבנת הדברים, ויבזבז כחותיו גם ללמודי חול, ובמשך הזמן יעשו למודי החול אצלו עיקר בהכרח כי הרי כח עצת היצר שבשביל זה התחילו לבטל למוד התורה וללמד למודי החול באיזה משך זמן יאמר לו אחרי עבור קצת ומן שצריך יותר זמן ללמודי חול אם אתה חושב להתפרנס, ואפילו בלא זה לא שייך להתגדל בתורה ואפילו להיות קצת תלמיד חכם ובן תורה אי אפשר בגזילת הזמן וגזילת העמילות בכשרונותיו מתורה ללמודי החול, ותחת לההגדל ירד מטה מטה, ובפרט שברור שאחרי שיתעסק כבר בלמודי חול כשיראה שאלו שהולכין לקאלעדז דהמדינה מצליחין יותר בשלימותן מכפי שהן מצליחין ילכו לבתי ספר (לסקולס) דהמדינה שיש שם כל התועבות שבעולם. בעצת היצר שהוא רק לזמן קטן, והוא לא יתקלקל שם. אשר כל אחד מבין ויודע שאינו כן, אבל איך שיהיה לא שיך שיהיה אף בן תורה וכ"ש שלא שייך שיעשה תלמיד חכם. וגם כל בן תורה ולומד בישיבות הקדושות צריך להשים אל לבו חורבן התורה הגדול שנעשה בעולם שהוא חיוב גדול על כל לומדי תורה בהישיבות שישתדלו להיות גדולי תורה והוראה ויראי שמים תחתם שוה ענין מוכרח לכל קהל ישראל.
סוף דבר הוא פשוט שאף ששתקינן ואין אומרין זה לכלל ישראל ואף לא לאלו השומרים תורת השי"ת הוא דבר האסור לבני תורה ובני ישיבות אשר כל אחד יכול להתגדל בתורה ולגזול הזמן והעמילות בהכשרונות מלמודי תורה ללמודי חול. ובדבר ענין פרנסה כבר ידוע כמדומני מה שאמרתי איזה פעמים שזהו עצת רשעים שהוזכר בריש תהלים. וכפ ישאיתא בתענית שם איכא ע"ז גם עונש גדול ח"ו ולהשומעים שלא לעזוב למוד התורה כלל אף לא לשעה יתברכו בהצלחה בתורה
כרצונם וגם בכל הגוף בכל הברכות.
משה פיינשטיין
It is not allowed to stop learning Torah to Learn Secular Studies
It is known to the world of Torah what I have said many times before Bnei Torah regarding secular studies for those studying in yeshiva.
The purpose of secular studies even when there isn't heresy and a Co-educational environment, is the prohibition of leaving the world of torah to pursue other matters even after one is a great scholar. Look into the story of Ilfa who was a tremendous scholar but for young men who haven't reached that level and need all of their strength that G-d has provided them and waste these strengths on secular studies.
During this time, he will make secular studies more important than religious studies because the evil inclination he will stop his learning of torah as he needs all his time to make sure he make a living.
But even without the idea of the slippery slope, it isn't possible to grow to be a slight Talmudic Scholar with all the theft of time that is being taken away for secular studies. And instead of growing in Torah, he will shrink and tumble.
In short, Rav Moshe Feinstein thinks that it is a terrible idea to go to college and learn any form of secular study for any purpose at any time.
Why do you think that?
Both issues that I have mentioned, that of general culture and that of Medinat Yisrael, have in a very real sense—although they are diverse—a common denominator. It may be summed up by the phrase, “Torah ve-,” Torah with something else.
Those who would subscribe to a position of “Torah only,” in reality do not do so. The gemara in Yevamot (109b) says: “A person who has nothing but Torah, does not have Torah either,” because that Torah is false, vacuous and invalid. Now, of course, the question is: What does one require besides Torah? Here there is room for different perceptions.
There is a remarkable comment by Rabbeinu Bachya ben Asher in his commentary on the Torah. In parashat Nitzavim, God tells us, “I have presented before you today life and goodness, and death and evil” (Devarim 30:15), followed by the injunction, “Choose life.” Naturally, we understand that “life and goodness” refer to Torah, and “death and evil” to something else. Rabbeinu Bachya, however, understands that the entire phrase— “life and goodness and death and evil”—applies to Torah. There is Torah which is “life and goodness,” and Torah which is “death and evil.”
In this respect, Rabbeinu Bachya is simply following the tradition of Chazal:
Rava said: Any talmid chakham (scholar) whose inside is not like his outside is not a talmid chakham. Abbaye, and some say Rabba bar Ulla, said: He is called “loathsome” . . .
R. Shemuel bar Nachmani said in the name of R. Yonatan: What is the meaning of the verse (Mishlei 17:16), “Why is there money in the hand of a fool to purchase wisdom, though he lacks heart (i.e. understanding)?” Woe unto talmidei chakhamim who engage in Torah but have no yirat Shamayim. . .
R. Yehoshua ben Levi said: What is the meaning of that which is written (Devarim 4:44), “This is the Torah which Moshe placed (sam) before the Children of Israel?” If one is worthy, the Torah becomes for him an elixir of life (sam chayyim); if one is not worthy, it becomes for him a potion of death (sam mita). (Yoma 72b)
This is analogous to the familiar gemara (Shabbat 31a) about those who have the keys to the inner doors and not to the outer doors, and therefore have no access to the treasure which lies within. Likewise, there are similar statements in the gemara in Ta’anit and a number of other places about the need for yirat Shamayim to accompany learning.
What clearly emerges from the sources which I have cited and to which I have alluded is the sense that, while one seemingly would feel that Torah alone is sufficient (“Turn it over and turn it over, for everything is in it”—Avot 5:22), nevertheless there is something else which needs to be added. What is that something else? Yirat Shamayim, of course. But perhaps other elements as well.
Some feel that, inasmuch as “Torah is the best merchandise” (in the words of the Yiddish aphorism), why should anyone devote any time at all to anything but the “best merchandise?” In one sense, this notion seems eminently sensible. But do we really conduct ourselves in this way in all areas of life? If someone says he wants a piece of bread and butter, do we tell him, “Fool, why bread and butter? What’s more important? Bread! So why put butter on the bread? Take two pieces of bread!” Of course not. But the question is, what is the butter and is there such a thing within this sphere?
THE POSSIBILITY OF INTEGRATION
Ibelieve that there is an analogue to butter, and there is much to be gained from it—even within the intellectual sphere itself, within learning proper, with reference to spiritual perception. Now, of course—and this cannot be reiterated too strongly— there are all kinds of caveats: the proper balance must be maintained, great care needs to be taken that improper or pernicious influences do not seep in, and we must always approach general culture critically, from a Torah perspective. But when that is done, the ability to incorporate something of general culture into the Torah world clearly exists.
There is a halakhic analogy upon which I would like to draw, by way of indicating what kind of process I think can take place here. Although one must separate challa only from dough made of the five grains, the mishna (Challa 3:7) tells us that if someone makes dough out of wheat flour and rice flour, he must take challa from all the dough, including the rice. The entire lump of dough becomes obligated in challa, even though rice is not one of the five grains. The gemara (Zevachim 78a) explains this on the basis of the law of ta’am ke-ikkar (taste is like substance): since the wheat imparts taste to the rice, the latter has the status of wheat. The Yerushalmi (Challa 1:1) offers a different explanation, based on the law ofgereira (dragging or integrating). Gereira applies only to wheat and rice—if you make dough out of wheat and potatoes, even though the effect on taste would be the same, there is no such law. When mixed with wheat, only rice—because it is biologically very similar to the cereal grains—can become attached, appended, integrated into the wheat.
So we have here the wheat proper and that which is nigrar— appended or incorporated—into the wheat. The same thing, I think, can apply within the spiritual order. There is Torah proper, and there is that which, properly integrated and related, can become nigrar. Not everything can benigrar, but there are things which can be. Here there is “Torah and,” but that “and,” to the extent that it is related to Torah, is metzuraf (attached) to it.
Secondly, the concept of “Torah and” suggests that there are other values besides intellection, other human and Jewish goals, that there is a need to supplement, to give an integrated vision of human life. The gemara in Avoda Zara (17b), which I have quoted many times with reference toHesder, speaks with great sharpness of someone who engages only in Torah and not in gemilut chasadim (acts of kindness): “It is as if he has no God!” Quite apart from learning—which is a cardinal, central value— there are other areas of human life that need to be dealt with. Surely, the creation and the sustenance of a viable and just society— chesed in the broader sense, as in “The world is built by chesed” (Tehillim 9:3)—needs to be perceived, and this too is a predominantly Centrist perception.
THEORY AND PRACTICE
Thus, the key issue distinguishing our approach from that of our colleagues on the Right is the question of whether to adopt an attitude of “everything is in Torah,” or to append, balance and round out. With respect to this issue, I think that we stand on solid ground. We have a position which need not be viewed as being the sole position, nor even be regarded historically as the majority position, but surely it is a sound, solid and legitimate position. I believe, therefore, that the problem confronting Centrist Orthodoxy today is not, or ought not to be, primarily ideological.
Even if our position is, in certain respects, a minority view among halakhic Jews, judged by either historical or contemporary reference, this need hardly dismay us. On some issues, there is no question that the kind of the position that I have outlined here has been a minority view. The question of general culture is, after all, quite old, and it is true: this position was in the minority at the time of the Rishonim and certainly in recent centuries in Eastern Europe. But no one questions that it is legitimate. In other areas, with regard to the fullness of life as opposed to constriction, I think we stand on the high ground: historically, ours has been the majority view. Those who now present constriction as an ultimate ideal represent the minority view.