Question: I find it very difficult to understand the punishment of death that was meted out to Rabbi Akiva’s students. If he was so great, we must assume that they were of a superior caliber. If so, why such a harsh punishment?
Zelig Aronson
Queens, N.Y.
Synopsis: We began our discussion citing the halachic strictures not to marry or cut our hair – both signs of mourning – (for a minimum period of 34 days) between Pesach and Shavuot because of the deaths of the students of Rabbi Akiva in that time period. We also sought to explain the reason for their being singled out for such harsh punishment. We cited proof from the transgression of the two sons of Aaron (Leviticus 1:7), and last week we cited Rambam’s ruling that one who issues a decision before his teacher is punishable by death [at Heaven’s hand]; hence Nadav and Avihu’s deaths, as well as the incidents relating to the sons of Nehonia the well-digger (Yevamot 121b). Hashem is very exacting with those closest to Him. Thus, the great students of Rabbi Akiva were punished for the slightest infraction.
* * * * *
Answer: My Mashgiach Ruchani, HaRav Hersh Feldman, zt”l, the Mirrer Mashgiach, gave a shmooze (talk) many years ago (see “Yemei Hasefira” in his Sefer Tiferet Tzvi p. 197) that elucidates this theme and views the tragedy of Rabbi Akiva’s students in a somewhat different light.
Rabbi Feldman begins: “Other than the actual prohibition as well as the gravity of the punishment and the tumah, the ritual impurity that is visited upon a person due to his haughtiness, we see that the traits of modesty and humility assist one in the acquisition of Torah knowledge. Our Sages (Ta’anit 7a) expound the verse (Isaiah 55:1), ‘Hoy kol tzamei lechu le’mayim’ – Ho! Everyone who is thirsty, go to the water… The ‘water’ here is the Torah, for which we thirst. Our Sages ask, ‘Why is the Torah compared to water? Just as water flows from an elevated place and settles in a lower place, so do the words of Torah exist only in an individual whose understanding [and very being] is humble.”
Rabbi Feldman continues by citing the Gemara (Eruvin 13b): “For three years there was a dispute between Beit Hillel and Beit Shammai. These said, ‘The halacha is in agreement with our views,’ and those asserted, ‘The halacha is in agreement with our views.’ A Heavenly voice went forth and proclaimed, ‘Both are the words of the living G-d [and G-d’s Torah], but the halacha is in agreement with Beit Hillel.’ The Gemara asks, ‘Now, since both are the words of the living G-d, what entitled Beit Hillel to have the halacha in agreement with their rulings?’
[This is the case in most circumstances of halachic dispute, although we do find that in 18 circumstances the halacha actually agrees with Beit Shammai – see Shabbos 13b and 17b, Mishna; see also Rambam, Perush HaMishnayot on Yevamot Ch. 3, stating that when Beit Hillel rule stringently and Beit Shammai are lenient, the halacha generally follows the latter. In the overwhelming number of situations, however, the halacha agrees with Beit Hillel, to the extent that our Sages state a rule (Berachot 36b) that the view of Beit Shammai, when it conflicts with that of Beit Hillel, is no Mishna – not an accepted teaching.]
“The Gemara answers: ‘Because they [Beit Hillel] were easygoing and very humble, and they would study their views and the views of Beit Shammai, and more so, they would always mention the views of Beit Shammai before their own.’”
Rabbi Feldman asks: “Since Beit Hillel were more easygoing and modest than Beit Shammai, is that [sufficient] reason to set forth the halacha in accord with them? We must explain: For one to hear and understand his fellow’s view and follow the logic of his reasoning to its natural conclusion, one must be graced with refined traits. One must not bear enmity to one’s fellow, nor be jealous of him, nor be contemptuous of him, which would be the result of boastfulness or haughtiness. A person who is conceited and haughty will not expend any effort to come to an understanding of his fellow’s view. Why? Obviously he considers his fellow’s view to be insignificant. It is surely not worth his while to exert any effort at understanding it. With such an approach he will never be able to comprehend his fellow’s view with any clarity.”
Rabbi Feldman continues: “Beit Hillel, however, who were easygoing and modest, traits that emanate from humility, expended great effort and toiled at understanding the views of their fellows [Beit Shammai] and to give them credit. This they did without any trace of negative personal motives. They would treat the views of their fellows deferentially, with the greatest respect, so that they would understand their decisions. More so, they would repeatedly study their [fellows’] views… They would even cite those [Beit Shammai’s] views before their own. If, after all that, they reached the conclusion that Beit Shammai’s view was incorrect and the halacha should not be as Beit Shammai established, then it was clear that the halacha should indeed follow Beit Hillel. This was so because weighing, deciding, and understanding the matters in question was arrived at after clear analysis, without any preconceived personal notions.”
Rabbi Feldman further explains: “The reason given for establishing the halacha according to Beit Hillel – that they were easygoing and modest – was not merely that these were good traits that they possessed. Rather, that was the very reason and rationale for the halacha to be established according to them.”
“Thus we can understand the Gemara (Yevamot 62, which we cited at the outset) stating that Rabbi Akiva had 12,000 pairs of students… and they all died in one period of time because they did not accord honor to one another. But we should not explain the actions of these Tannaim, the students of Rabbi Akiba, in such a simple manner.
“Rather, we must understand it to mean that Rabbi Akiva’s students did not reach the level of humility that Beit Hillel had successfully attained.”
Rabbi Feldman concludes: “Since they did not attain that level, they were not able to achieve the clarity necessary to reach a final conclusion. Thus, their Torah study was not considered worthy to be transmitted to future generations of the Jewish nation because it lacked full veracity.
“However, Rabbi Akiva’s students were not taken from this world as a punishment [to them]. Rather, they and their Torah study were removed due to the aforementioned reasons.”
We ourselves would be wise to heed Rabbi Akiva’s famous teaching (Jerusalem Talmud, Nedarim 9:4) – which he extrapolates from the verse in Parashat Kedoshim (Leviticus 19:18) “Ve’ahavta le’re’acha kamocha… Zeh k’lal gadol baTorah” – Love your fellow as yourself… This is a great principle in the Torah.”
Now that Shavuot has passed, when we were all “k’ish echad b’lev echad” – as one person with one heart as we accepted the Torah – let us take the lesson of that great moment and apply it to our everyday life in our service of Hashem as we seek to improve our treatment of each other as we anxiously await the arrival of Moshiach Tzidkeinu, the righteous scion of King David, speedily in our days.
