with a select treasury of commentaries on all levels of Torah interpretation
Chapter 1 Mishna 17
with select commentaries
Commentaries used in this translation:
Rashi Commentary (1040-1105)
Rambam Commentary (1135-1204)
Rabbi Ovadiah of Bartenura Commentary (1445-1515)
Tiferet Yisrael commentary (1782–1860)
Rabeinu Yonah (1180-1263)
Derech Chaim - Maharal of Prague (1525-1609) (hebrewbooks.org/14193)
Biur HaGra of Rabbi Eliyahu of Vilna - (1720-1797)
Rabbi Avraham Azoulai commentary - (1570-1643)
Rabbi Chayim Yosef David Azoulai (Chida) commentary - (1724-1806)
Chatam Sofer commentary - (1762-1839), along with Ktav Sofer, and others
Ben Ish Chai commentary - (1835-1909)
and many more..
Commentary Level:
- Min - (level 1) for basic commentaries as relating to the plain meaning (Pshat).
- Med - (level 2) elaborates more into the theme.
- Max - (level 3) deeper in, Maharal of Prague.
- Max+ - (level 4) more themes in the text.
- ShortMix - (recommended) short version of level 4.
Link to this page:
+ Increase Font Size | - Decrease Font Size
Chapter 1 Mishna 17פרק א משנה יז
| Shimon his son said: All my days I have grown up among the Sages and I have not found anything as good for the body as silence. And not study but practice is the primary thing. And whoever multiplies words brings sin. | שִׁמְעוֹן בְּנוֹ אוֹמֵר, כָּל יָמַי גָּדַלְתִּי בֵין הַחֲכָמִים, וְלֹא מָצָאתִי לַגּוּף טוֹב אֶלָּא שְׁתִיקָה. וְלֹא הַמִּדְרָשׁ הוּא הָעִקָּר, אֶלָּא הַמַּעֲשֶׂה. וְכָל הַמַּרְבֶּה דְבָרִים, מֵבִיא חֵטְא: |
Rashi - "silence" - for even a silent fool will be considered a wise man. So too for the opposite. If one speaks much with people, and for everything he advances himself in to answer (makdim atzmo lehashiv), then even if he is a wise man, people will consider him a fool. Therefore, there is nothing as good as silence until one can see.
"not study but practice is the primary thing" - for one who does the mitzva is greater than one who learns but does not do.
Bartenura - "silence" - he who hears insults and remains quiet.
"not study but practice is the primary thing" - know that silence is good, for even learning studying and expounding Torah of which nothing is greater, nevertheless, the primary reward therein is only for deed (fulfilling what one learns). And one who preaches but does not fulfill (doresh v'eino mekayem), it would have been better for him had he remained silent and not preached.
"whoever multiplies words brings sin" - as we find by Chava. She increased speech and said: "but G-d said, 'you shall not eat of it, and you shall not touch it, lest you die.'" (Gen.3:3)
She added "touching", which was not forbidden to her. The serpent pushed her till she touched it and then said: "just like there is no death in touching it, so too there is no death in eating from it". Due to this, she came to sin, eating from the tree. This is what Shlomo said: "Do not add to His words, lest He prove to you, and you be found a liar" (Mishlei 30).
Ruach Chaim - i.e. regarding matters of the body, silence is a good trait. But in Torah, one needs to specifically speak fully (davka b'peh maleh), as our sages said on the verse "for they are life for those who find (motzehem) them" (Mishlei 4:22) - "for those who utter them (motziem b'pe)" (Eiruvin 64a).
But even so, do not think that "study is the primary thing".
"whoever multiplies words brings sin" - in Avot d'Rebbi Natan (1:5), they brought a proof to this from Adam HaRishon. In order to fence (protect) the matter, he added words on his own and told Chava (Eve) that even touching the tree is forbidden. This made things worse (for Chava touched the tree and nothing happened, thus leading her to eat from it). And that which was said earlier: "make a fence for the Torah" (Avot 1:1), this refers to when one informs the people what is the main law (ikar hadin) and what is the fence.
For then, even if ch'v they transgress the fence, at least they will not transgress the main law. But Adam HaRishon told Chava that G-d commanded even on touching. Thus he came to make things worse.
Rabbi Avraham Azoulai - Ahava b'Taanugim - "Shimon his son said" - some say this is Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel mentioned next mishna. But this was said in his youth before he received smicha (as Nassi).
"All my days I have grown up among the Sages" - i.e. it is proper for you to rely on me in this. For I checked it and tested it much and found it to be true... this comes to exhort the students who grow among the sages, as he in his youth was silent before his Rabbis. But this exhortation is not for the sages when they teach the students. The Rav does not need to be silent. But rather, to teach the student in concise manner. Perhaps this is what he said afterwards "whoever multiplies words brings sin".
Some explain: I did not find mussar which avails more than silence (mussar yoter mo'il min hashtika). If you ask: "but one needs to speak with people so they will like him and draw him close and benefit him?" On this he said: "And not study but practice is the primary thing", for the drawing close or distancing of him will be according to his deeds.
Ben Ish Chai - Chasdei Avot - "all my days I have grown up among the Sages and I have not found anything as good for the body as silence" - the sages' occupation is in speech, as written: "it is life for those who utter them (motziem b'pe)" (Eiruvin 64a), and "a certain student (of her husband) was learning Torah quietly, she kicked him...", as brought in Eiruvin.
Thus, I am used to speaking much. But nevertheless, "I have not found anything as good for the body as silence", i.e., in matters of the body. Despite that I am a talker in divrei Torah and am used to speaking and not keeping quiet.
Ben Ish Chai - Birkat Avot - "whoever multiplies words brings sin" - it is known that one who speaks evil speech (lashon hara) on his fellow, through this, he takes all his fellow's sins. It is also known that one who increases to talk useless speech (marbe l'daber devarim beteilim) will perforce come to speak lashon hara also.
For this is the way of excessive speech. It goes from one evil to another until he stumbles in the sin of lashon hara or the like. Through this it is understood: "whoever multiplies words brings sin", in the end, he will bring sin to himself from others.
Namely, he will stumble in the sin of lashon hara, and through this he takes sins from other people which he spoke lashon hara against and brings them to himself. This is the meaning of "brings sin". He brings them from others.
It is known that just like it is a mitzva to say something that will be listened to, so too, it is a mitzva to not say something that will not be listened to. On this he said: "And not study but practice is the primary thing".
Thus one who expounds to the public needs to expound on something that will be listened to in order that action will result from this. For "the drash (sermon) is not primary rather "practise", which the people will do through the power of the drosh".
Thus, "whoever multiplies words brings sin", i.e., that he says something that will not be listened to and nothing but words without action will come out from this - in this he brings sin. For on the contrary, better to not say it.
Chida - Chasdei Avot - i.e. those who expound to the public (doresh b'rabim), they try to expound wondrous matters and complex expositions in sugyot of tosfot and poskim.
But they don't expound to rebuke the people, to inform them of the large or small sins they stumble in.
For this is the whole fruit of the exposition (drosh) - to bring the people to repentance (teshuva).
This is: "And not study but practice is the primary thing" - to not make primary to expound and present sayings and teachings to demonstrate wisdom. Rather "practice is the primary thing" - to rebuke the people..
Rambam - the wise man already said: "in the multitude of words there lacks not sin" (Mishlei 10:19)..
The reason for this is increasing of words is considered "superfluous of permitted" and sin. (explained shortly)
For when one increases speech he will inevitably come to transgression, since it is impossible that in his words there will not be [at least] one word which is not proper to say.
Among the signs of the wise is few words while among the signs of the fool is many words, as written: "and the voice of the fool with many words" (Kohelet 5:2). And our sages said that speaking few words is a mark of the [inherited] virtue of the forefathers and indicates one's genealogy from them. Thus they said: "silence in Babylon is the mark of genealogy" (Kidushin 71b).
It is written in the book of Middot (see Orchot Tzadikim shaar hashtika) that one of the sages appeared to be very silent. He would not utter a word that was not proper to say and only spoke a little bit. He was asked on this and he replied:
I examined all words and found that they fall into four categories.
The first: these are entirely harmful, without any benefit, such as cursing people, obscene words, or the like, where speaking them is a complete foolishness.
The second category: these are harmful from one side and beneficial from another. For example, praising a person in order to receive some benefit whereby this praise will anger his enemy and harm the person praised. Due to this reason (of harm), one needs to refrain from this category also.
The third category: these are neither beneficial nor harmful such as most words of the masses. "How was that wall built?", "How was that palace built", talking over about "how beautiful is such and such's house", "the many towers in such and such a country", or the like of permitted things. These things are also superfluous. There is no benefit in them.
The fourth category: these are entirely beneficial, such as words of wisdom and virtue (chochmot u'maalot). Likewise for speaking in things which his life depends on and which will prolong his existence (his livelihood). For these one needs to speak.
Thus, whenever I hear things, I examine them. If I find they belong to this fourth category, I speak in them. But if I find they belong to the other categories, I keep silent from them. end quote.
The men of virtue (baalei middot) said (regarding this silent man): "examine this man and his wisdom. For he lacks three fourths of the words (of most people). This is a wisdom which one needs to study".
(Rambam continues:) I say that according to the obligations of the Torah, speech falls into five categories:
One, speech which is a mitzva.
Two, speech which is forbidden and we are warned against.
Three, speech which is repulsive (nimas).
Four, speech which is beloved (ne'ehav).
Five, speech which is permitted (mutar).
One, speech which is a mitzva: this refers to reading and study of the Torah and reading its talmud (explanations). This is a positive obligatory mitzvah, as written: "you shall speak in them" (Devarim 6:7). And this mitzvah weighs like all the other mitzvot [combined]. We have already elaborated more on this elsewhere.
Two, speech which is forbidden: such as false testimony, lies, slander, obscene talk, and curses. The Torah teaches on this division.
Three, repulsive speech: this kind has no benefit. But it is not sin nor rebelling, such as most speech of the masses on what happened and what was, what are the conducts of king so and so in his palace, what caused the death of so and so, how so and so became rich, etc.
The sages called these "idle speech" (Sicha beteila). The Chasidim strove to abstain from this category of speech.It was said on Rav, the disciple of Rebbi Chiya that he never spoke idle talk all of his life.
Included in this category is to scorn a virtue or praise an evil, whether in traits or in intellect (wisdom).
Four, speech which is beloved: this refers to speech in praising virtues of intellect or good traits, and likewise in scorning the disgraceful of both types (intellect or bad traits).
For example, to rouse the soul to the virtues through stories and songs, and to praise the virtuous people and commend their virtues in order to esteem them in the eyes of people and inspire them to walk in their ways.
This category also includes scorning the disgracefulness of the evil people in order to belittle their ways and remembrance in the eyes of people so that they will distance from them and their evil ways and will not act like them.
This category, namely, study of the virtuous traits and distancing from the reprehensible ones is called "derech eretz" (lit. the way of the land).
The fifth category is permitted speech. This refers to speech regarding people's business trade, livelihood, food, drink, clothing, and other needs. It is "permitted", not having of the "beloved" nor of the "repulsive" [content]. But [it is optional], if he wants, he may speak in this, and if he does not want, he may refrain from speaking.
In this category, a man is praiseworthy when he minimizes speaking therein. The men of mussar exhorted to not increase speech in this.
But the "forbidden" and "repulsive" do not need exhorting nor command (to minimize in them). For it is proper to be completely silent from these.
But for the type which is "mitzva" or "beloved", if a man could speak in them all his days, it would be good. But one needs to be careful of two things:
One, that one's words are consistent with one's deeds, as they said: "the words are pleasing when uttered by those who practice them" (Tosefta Yevamot ch.8).
This is the intent of "And not study but practice is the primary thing".
The sages told the tzadik to learn the virtues, as they said: "expound! it is becoming of you to expound (derosh ulecha na'eh lidrosh)" (Bava Batra 75a), and the prophet said: "sing praises to the L-ord, O you righteous: for praise is befitting for the upright" (Tehilim 33:1).
The second matter is conciseness (kitzur), to strive to include much in few words, and not the opposite.
This is what they said: "one should always teach his student in concise terms" (Pesachim 3b)...
Since we mentioned slander (lashon hara) in the category of forbidden speech, I saw proper to discuss a bit on this. For people are greatly blind to this, and it is always the greatest sin of people. All the more so in light of what our sages said that a man is not saved from the "dust of slander" every day (Bava Batra 164b). And would that it were (halevai), that we were saved from slander itself... (see there for more)
Sforno - "I have not found anything as good for the body as silence" - many think the power of speech in man is his most noble power. Some even say that this is what distinguishes man from the other living creatures and a man is greater than his fellow in proportion to his greater wisdom of speech (chachmat hadibur).
But this sage states that despite all its qualities, speech does not avail the body at all. As we find that other living things (animals) live long and attain their sustenance painlessly without employing any speech at all.
Rather the benefit obtained from speech is in its use by the practical intellect (sechel hamaasi) for secular matters and in the in-depth intellect (sechel iyuni) for teaching others.
But even with all this benefit, "not study" and speech "is primary", and the intended purpose. Rather, the intended purpose is "practice is the primary thing" that follows from it, whether in secular matters or in the study of intellectual matters. And even in these, minimal speech is good as is learning in a concise manner.
"whoever multiplies words brings sin" - for more doubts, errors, and forgetting will befall the (many) words.
From all this, it follows that speech itself is not sheleimut (perfection). Without a doubt, it is merely a tool to attain the intended purpose in secular matters and in wisdom. Namely, to communicate the thoughts of one's heart to another. This should be done in as few words as possible. This is unlike all things which are in and of themselves perfection (shelemut), whereby the more the better.
Maharal - This sage came to exhort on rectifying man's body. After seeing his father (Rabban Gamliel) giving mussar that man's deeds should be proper in his being a possessor of intellect (baal sechel), namely, that he not walk in darkness (doubt), as explained, this sage now came to give mussar on rectifying a man in his being a possessor of body (baal guf).
It is proper to ask:
1. why does he need to say: "all my days I have grown up among the Sages, etc".
2. what does this have to do with "And not study but practice is the primary thing".
3. likewise, he starts with "silence" and afterwards moves to "And not study but practice is the primary thing" and then returns back to the original matter "whoever multiplies words brings sin"?
4. the choice of language "I have not found anything as good for the body as silence", he should have said "I have not found anything as good for a man as silence".
5. he said "whoever multiplies words brings sin" - this is already stated explicitly in scripture - "in the multitude of words there lacks not sin" (Mishlei 10:19).
Rashi explains that even by the sages (Chachamim), I found that silence is good (yafeh) for them. For thus they would conduct themselves in silence. And all the more so for people who are not sages (Chachamim), silence is good (yafeh) for them.
The explanation of "I have not found anything as good for the body as silence" is that in man being possessor of a body (baal guf), silence is good for him (yafe lo). This is because speech is from the "nefesh hamedaberet" (speaking soul), which is a power of the body (koach gufani) and not entirely intellect (eino sichli l'gamrei).
Therefore, silence is proper for him, so he does not come to error and confusion (ta'ut v'shibush).
Because when he activates (poel) the power of speech, he annuls (bitel) the power of intellect, as we will explain shortly.
Therefore, he should keep silent and activate the power of intellect which is not bodily like the power of speech. For the latter inevitably comes to err.
It is proper to know that the intellect and the body are opposites to each other. Therefore, he said: "I have not found anything as good for the body as silence", instead of "it is not good (yafeh) for the body to speak". For the lacking is not from the side of speech itself. Only that silence is good for a person so that he can activate the power of the intellect.
This comes to teach that when a man is silent, then the intellect can activate its work. For it is impossible for two opposites to operate simultaneously in man - the intellect and the body. Therefore, if the power of the body operates, namely, the intellect of speech (sechel hadavri), then the intellect of in-depth thought (sechel iyuni) cannot operate and he will come to error.
Thus, it is proper for him to be silent and not activate the power of speech and then the intellect can activate its working (az hasechel yifal peulato).
This is the meaning of "the only good for the body is silence (ein tov laguf rak shetika)". For certainly it is good and proper for the body to keep quiet and give room for the intellect to activate its working.
Thus the body will be annulled (subordinate) to the intellect and become a "tail to a lion". But if he increases speech, then the intellect is annulled to the body and becomes a "tail to a fox", and then there is no intellect at all.
Therefore, he said "I have not found anything as good for the body as silence" due to the reason we mentioned.
Thus every fool increases speech. For the intellect and the body are two opposites. But the Chacham (wise man) will operate always with his intellect and not with the bodily speech...
"not study but action is the primary thing" - so that you should not say: "since silence, which is absence of acting, is best for man because he needs to operate with the intellect, if so, the midrash (study) is primary, not the action. For action is of the body, while midrash (study) is of the intellect".
Even though midrash is very great indeed, but nevertheless, the primary thing is action. Only that the midrash which is the intellect is a lofty quality. But nevertheless action is the foundation (yesod), and one needs to have a prepared foundation first before he can acquire the virtues of intellect (maalot hasechel). After the foundation is ready, he can build up and up. This is clear to anyone whose (good) deeds are many..
"whoever multiplies words brings sin" - i.e. certainly silence is good for the body as we explained, since it allows the intellect to operate its work and this is a virtue (maala).
But it is not proper to say that he sins if he increases speech. For the power of speech is a power by itself. If he wishes to operate this power and not grant all his power to the intellect, it is not relevant to call this sin.
However, when one increases speech, he nevertheless brings sin. For according to what we explained, silence is proper so that the intellect be primary and the power of speech be annulled to it.
Granted, if he does not choose to be silent, there is no sin here also. But nevertheless to increase speech and make the power of speech primary [he will thus] annul the power of the intellect. Since as before, all the time the power of speech operates, it is impossible for the intellect to activate its work properly. For they are two opposites. And certainly, this is a lacking for a man - to be drawn after the power of speech completely, a power which is not completely intellect (eino sichli legamrei).
Therefore, it is considered a lacking when he is drawn after it. And a lacking draws another lacking after it. For every lacking pulls in another lacking.
This is the meaning of "brings sin". For sin is lacking. Because the term "sin" (chet) means everywhere "lacking". For example: "I and my son Shlomo will be found lacking (chataim)" (Melachim I 1:1), or "I [bore] the loss (echatena)" (Bereishit 31).
Therefore, one who increases speech will come to sin and lacking. This is especially so when the lacking is from something stemming from the powers of the body. Such a lacking will draw more lackings after it.
Furthermore, there is another very deep matter in this. The power of speech is unlike the power of intellect. The power of intellect has no limit.
The power of speech is like a tzura (form), For the tzura (form/definition) of man is a "speaking creature" (chai medaber). And as known regarding the tzura, it has no superfluousness at all (ein bo tosefet klal). Therefore, whoever increases speech comes out of the proper and coming out of the proper in something like this brings sin. Understand this.
If you ask: but this teaching was already explicitly stated in scripture: "in the multitude of words there lacks not sin" (Mishlei 10)?
[answer]: that verse is not referring to "coming to sin" (like here). Rather, it is only saying that due to speaking many words, it is impossible to not sin and utter words of foolishness and vanity. But here he says "brings sin", i.e. draws sin after himself. This is a different matter.
This is the explanation of the mishna when you understand..
Birkat Shmuel - "for the body (guf) as silence" - a hint to the Geula, as written "[Moshiach] Ben David won't arrive until all the souls are depleted from the body (Guf)" (Yevamot 63b).
(Translator: i.e. best to keep quiet and not make predictions as the Rambam wrote: "man will not know how they will occur until they occur.." (Hilchot Melachim 12:2)
Ben Ish Chai - Chasdei Avot - since Moshiach will come with Hesech Daat (momentarily forgetting). Thus, it is best to keep quiet to hasten the Redemption.
Chasdei David - "not study but practice is the primary thing" - in the talmud when Rabbi Yochanan implies Torah study is greater than action, the talmud asks (Bava Kamma 17a): "but did not the master say that Torah study is great in that it brings to action?" (Rashi-which implies action is greater than Torah study). The talmud answers:
"it is not difficult. One refers to study of Torah, and the other refers to teaching of Torah".
Rashi there explains: "to learn for yourself, action is greater. But teaching others is greater than action"..
According to Rashi's explanation, there are three levels. The lowest is to learn for oneself. Middle level is to fulfill, for this is the purpose of learning. The highest of all is teaching others. For "the merit of the masses depends on him" (Avot 5:21)..
Tosfot says there that learning is greater than action.. as the talmud says: "learning is greater since it brings to action" (Kidushin 40b)..
Thus that which we say learning is greater, this refers to one who did not learn yet and comes to ask what he should do. Should he learn first or toil in action? We tell him to learn first. For "an ignorant man cannot be pious" (Avot 2:6). But for one who is already a Chacham (scholar), action is better than learning.
Thus here he says: "All my days I have grown up among the Sages". For specifically for a Chacham who already learned "action is better than learning".
In the Talmud: "three people I hate, a sar hanargan..." (Niddah 16b).
Rashi explains "sar hanargan" refers to a Torah scholar who speaks much. According to this, on the contrary, a Torah scholar is worse than other people.
Chida - Chasdei Avot - "And not study but practice is the primary thing" - perhaps because action (maase) is to rectify [the world] of Asiyah while speech in Torah is to rectify [the world] of Yetzira, and how is it possible to rectify Yetzira before Asiyah? Therefore "action is primary" for it rectifies Asiyah. And after he rectifies Asiyah, his torah study avails to rectify Yetzira.
Chida - Chasdei Avot - "whoever multiplies words brings sin" - perhaps this is as brought in the Reishit Chachma that our sages said that one who increases evil speech (marbe lashon hara) causes the Samech-Mem to enter among the holy Tzadikim elyonim above, etc. and this is an extremely severe sin (avon plili). He is a cause of damage (shehu garma b'nezikin). For he caused to grant the Samech-Mem permission to enter in a holy place... (see there at length). This is the hint: "whoever increases speech (kol hamarbe devarim)" - he will nevertheless come to say forbidden words. This causes that he "brings sin" (mevi chet), a hint to the Samech-Mem who is himself a sin (chet), and he brings him to the holy place..
Chida - Roshei Avot - "all my days I have grown up among the Sages and I have not found anything as good for the body as silence" - we may explain according to what our sages said in the Midrash Shocher Tov: "when a man speaks devarim betalim (useless chatter), correspondingly words of Torah come out. This is analogous to a barrel full of honey.. [when one adds things a corresponding volume of honey comes out of the barrel].."
Likewise the kabbalists wrote that due to sin, some or all of one's holiness departs, and then, immediately, the Sitra Achra comes.
When a man fulfills a positive commandment, he rectifies the nefesh (lower soul), and when he learns Torah, he rectifies the ruach (higher soul). If so, the body has nothing. But we find that the body does have a quality, namely, it is a temple (mishkan) to the Torah. Thus holiness rests in his innards and the body is a temple (mishkan) of holiness (kedusha).
However, if he speaks useless speech (devarim betalim), words of Torah come out and the sitra achra enters. This is the meaning of: "All my days I have grown up among the Sages", already in my youth I received Torah (gamirna girsa) from one Rav and afterwards I contemplated it (lemisbar) among many sages. For to contemplate it, many Rabbis is better, as written in Avodah Zara 19a.
"and I have not found anything as good for the body as silence" - for then, the Torah is guarded inside and the body becomes a mishkan for Torah and kedusha, and this is good for it. For "one saves the cover of a sefer Torah with the sefer Torah".
"whoever multiplies words brings sin" - besides that he takes out Torah and holiness from inside himself, furthermore, he stumbles in bringing the Sitra Achra in place of the holiness, may Hash-em save us.