Commentary for Pirkei Avot 3:8

ANYONE WHO FORGETS. “Anyone” means to include even one who forgets out of laziness, as I will explain below. Midrash Shmuel writes that even one who forgets because he is busy providing for his family is as if he has forfeited his life, for the verse clearly says, “cast your burden upon G-d” (Psalms 55:23), and only he who forgets due to the difficulty of the material is exempt.

Rabbi Dostai beRebbe Yannai in the name of Rabbi Meir says: Anyone who forgets one thing from his studies - Scripture considers him as if he is liable for [forfeiture of] his life, as it is said (Deuteronomy 4:9): "Only guard yourself, etc.: As he did not put it into his heart to say that forgetting is common with people. He should have reviewed the law many times and be thinking about it the whole day and the whole night, until it could not leave his heart. And [as] he did not, he is liable for [forfeiture of] his life; since he will come to give rulings according to his memory and say, "So said Rabbi." And [so] he will forbid the permissible and permit the forbidden and a mishap will come from his hand; and he will be called a sinner, 'for an error in study is considered an intentional transgression.'

"Anyone": [is coming] to include even because of laziness. And Midrash Shmuel wrote, even if it as a result of his being preoccupied in search of [sustenance] for his family, nonetheless he is liable for his life. As it is an explicit verse [that informs us of this], "Cast your burden unto the Lord, etc." And the only one who is exempt is the "one [whose studies] have overpowered," etc.

"Anyone who forgets one matter from his studies": Since he did not review it, it is considered "as if he is liable for his life;" as from his forgetting, he will come to permit the forbidden. And it will come out that a calamity will come through him and his mistake will be counted as a willful transgression. And also (another explanation is), it is "as if he is liable for his life" - since that teaching was guarding him and now he forgot it, it no [longer] guards him.

Introduction Rabbi Dostai’s teaching is a continuation of the previous mishnah. Whereas there the topic was one who interrupts his learning, here the topic is one who forgets that which he has already learned.

ONE THING. For every one thing, there are many things that depend on it, so forgetting one thing can properly be included in “lest you forget the things”—Midrash Shmuel. I say that it is the double injunction “only take care, and be exceedingly wary” which implies that one should take care not to forget a single thing.

One could [suppose this statement applies to] even one whose studies have overpowered him; therefore, the verse says, "and lest they depart from your heart all the days of your life" - he is not liable for [forfeiture of] his life until he sits down and [intentionally] removes them from his heart: If he forgot it due to old age or due to another [matter out of his control], the Merciful One exempts him.

"one thing": As there is no such thing as "one thing" upon which many other things are not dependent. And therefore with the "one thing" that he forgot, "lest you forget the things" is fulfilled - Midrash Shmuel. And it appears to me that it is written, "guard yourself, and guard" [with the word, "guard] doubled; which is to give a guarding upon each word.

"whose studies have overpowered him": As it was difficult for him, and on account of the difficulty in it, he forgot it.

Rabbi Dostai ben Rabbi Yannai said in the name of Rabbi Meir: whoever forgets one word of his study, scripture accounts it to him as if he were mortally guilty, as it is said, “But take utmost care and watch yourselves scrupulously, so that you do not forget the things that you saw with your own eyes” (Deuteronomy 4:9). One could [have inferred that this is the case] even when his study proved [too] hard for him, therefore scripture says, “that they do not fade from your mind as long as you live” (ibid.). Thus, he is not mortally guilty unless he deliberately removes them from his heart. The problem of forgetting that which one has already learned is one of the most serious problems that the rabbis encountered. Although we have the Mishnah in front of us in a book, for the rabbis who lived during this period the Mishnah and the Talmud and all of their works were oral. Therefore one had to repeat his learning frequently in order to commit it to memory. Indeed the meaning of the word “mishnah” is to teach through repetition. One who forgets his learning is in some ways worse than one who has never learned, because the one who forgets had knowledge at one point but was careless in its preservation. The second half of Rabbi Dostai’s statement is an essential reservation on the first half. One who has trouble learning, but genuinely tries his best, is not to be faulted for his forgetfulness. Rabbi Dostai recognizes that remembering the complicated oral Torah is not easy, and that not all people are built for such types of intellectual activity. Therefore he clarifies that only one who forgets out of negligence or on purpose neglects his study is mortally guilty. Perhaps I should emphasize here to those who have been learning Mishnah Yomit for some time that review of the material is as important, if not more important, than continuing to learn new material. By reviewing that which you have already learned your background in Jewish learning will increase. By analogy, think how much better you remember a movie after you have seen it two or three times. Reading through mishnayoth which you learned in the past is essential.

UNLESS HE SITS AND REMOVES THEM FROM HIS HEART. I.e., that he sits and turns his mind to idle things, and through this they depart from his heart. Now this is true even if he does not intend thereby to forget, for the verse does not say “lest you remove them” but “lest they depart,” which implies that they depart on their own. The language of our mishna also indicates as much, as the mishna does not say “one might think that this is true even of one who hasn’t removed them,”¹⁰²But they have departed on their own, due to idleness. The mishna says only “one might think that this is true even of one for whom the material was too difficult,” meaning that only that case is excluded. The middle case—someone who, on the one hand, does not intentionally forget, but on the other hand, forgets not due to difficulty but because of idleness—is included in the verse. for the only exemption is for difficulty, whereas allowing them to depart on their own is included in “lest they depart.” So Maharal in Derech Chaim.
Now if we read “and one who turns” in mishna 4 above, making it a separate case in that mishna,¹⁰³See the Tosafot Yom Tov there. we must somehow distinguish between that mishna, which is a case of one who turns his mind to idle things and who “forfeits his life,” and our mishna, which is a case of one who sits idly and is only “considered as if.” I say, therefore, that there are three categories here. The first is one who intends to remove the Torah from his heart, which is the case neither of our mishna nor the one discussed by R. Chanina ben Chachinai, but is R. Nechunya ben HaKana’s case of one who “throws off the yoke of Torah” in mishna 5. The second is one who does not intend for the Torah to depart from his heart and would be happy not forgetting it, but who prefers idleness over Torah study and is constantly seeking out idle pleasures; this is the case discussed by R. Chanina ben Chachinai, and that one forfeits his life. The third is one who does not prefer idleness over Torah study, but when some idle thing presents itself he idles and thereby gets lazy and does not review his learning, which is the case of our misha where he “sits and removes them from his heart,” i.e. through remaining idle they depart from his heart. This is what seems correct.

"and [intentionally] removes them": which is to say that he sits and turns his heart to idleness and, through this, removes them form his heart - and even though it is not volitional that, in this way, they be removed from his heart; since it is not written, "lest you remove them," but rather "lest they are removed," and it is [thus] implied, [even if they are removed] on their own. And so [too] was the language of the mishnah precise; as it did not teach, "One could [suppose this statement applies to] even one who did not remove them;" as it only excluded [the one whose learning] overpowered him. But if it automatically got removed, it is also within the prohibition of "lest they are removed" - Derekh Chaim. And all of this is when he does not want idleness more than words of Torah, but when a matter of idleness comes to his hand, he sits idly [with it] and is negligent from going back to his study because of it. And therefore it only taught it "considers, etc. as if." But our Mishnah (4) that "he is liable for his life" is [about] the "one who turns, etc." who wants idleness more than involvement in Torah and [so] seeks and searches out idleness. But, nonetheless, if he would not forget them, it would be preferable to him. And Rabbi Nechunia ben Hakanah in our Mishnah 5, "one who casts [from himself] the yoke," is speaking about one who intends to remove words of Torah from his heart. So does it appear to me.