פירוש על אבות 1:4

YOSSI BEN YO`EZER. Rav: all of the tannaim menioned in this chapter are pairs—so-and-so and so-and-so received the tradition from so-and-so and so-and-so—the first one in the pair was the Nassi<sup>16</sup>The supervisor of the Sanhedrin and leader of the Jews recognized by the Roman government. and the second was the Av Beit Din<sup>17</sup>The highest-ranking member of the Sanhedrin., per the mishna in Chagiga 2:2.
Tosafot, commenting on the Talmud ad loc. (s.v. Yossi), write in the name of the Jerusalem Talmud that the period of Yossi ben Yo`ezer and Yossi ben Yochanan saw the first unresolved legal dispute in Israel. Based on this, I say that no pairs preceding them are mentioned because there was one head in each generation and he had no competing peer, whereas starting with them the “rope was unraveled” and there were two leaders.
Even so the Torah of each was authentic, as they had each received the tradition, and the disputes arose only concerning decisions that depended on reasoning or that had to be resolved through one of the thirteen rules of interpretation,¹⁸The thirteen rules of R. Yishmael found at the beginning of the Sifra. as Rambam writes at length in his introuction to the Mishna.

Yose ben Yoezer, man of Tsreida, and Yose ben Yochanan, man of Jerusalem, received from him: From Shimon the Righteous and Antigonos, man of Sokho

"A meeting house": A house of meeting, meaning to say that you should make your house always available for the gathering of sages, like in synagogues and houses of study (batei midrash); such that if a man says to his fellow, "Where can I meet with you, where can I confer with you," he will [answer] him, "In the house of x."

They received from them: The explanation [of "from them"] is from Shimon and Antigonos - Rama. And there are books that have the textual variant, "from him." And Midrash Shmuel wrote that it is a [more] exact version, if it is substantiated. And see the Tosafot Yom Tov.

Yose ben Yoezer, man of Tsreida and Yose ben Yochanan, man of Jerusalem: All the Tannaim (early teachers) mentioned in this chapter by pairs, ‘(Rabbi) x and (Rabbi) y, who received from (Rabbi) a and (Rabbi) b,’ the first of them is nassi, and the second is the head of the court.

Introduction After the teaching of Antigonus from Socho, the mishnah begins with a period in Jewish history known as the period of the “pairs”. There are five “pairs” of Sages that are mentioned in our chapter, beginning in this mishnah and continuing through mishnah fifteen. The final pair are Hillel and Shammai. We should note how important the concept of the Sage and learning from the Sage is in this mishnah and in the entire chapter. The “pairs” lived in the period between the Maccabean revolt (167 B.C.E.) until about two generations before the destruction of the Temple, which was in 70 C.E. This was a time when many Jews became greatly influenced by Helenistic culture. It was also the formative period of many of the sects, including the Sadducees and probably the Essenes (as well as the Dead Sea sect, who were probably Essenes). It was probably also the formative period for the Pharisees, the predecessors of the Rabbis of the Mishnah and Talmud. Against this historical backdrop it is easy to understand why these Sages were so concerned with the authority and influence that they would have on the general public.

RECEIVED THE TRADITION FROM THEM. Ramah explains “them” as referring to Simon and Antigonos. R. Yosef ibn Nahmias, quoted in Midrash Shmuel, writes that they first studied under Simon the Righteous, who died before they had completed their studies; they then went and studied under Antigonos, who held the post of Simon the Righteous until his death. They in turn filled his position.
But what Midrash Shmuel writes in the name of R. Yehuda Lerma, that it was actually their contemporaries who “received the tradition from them,” and that this is how one might read each instance of “receiving” in this chapter—this seems quite dubious. For even though there is some slight support for this reading from the fact that the mishna does not explicitly say “they received the tradition from Simon and Antigonos” the way it says earlier of Antigonos that he “received the tradition from Simon,” on the whole this interpretation is quite unlikely.
First of all, it would be strange to mention that others received the tradition from them while not mentioning that they received the tradition themselves. Secondly, the tanna’s main point in mentioning the tradition is to show that the chain of tradition starts at Sinai and passes from scholar to scholar down to this author, whose work is a compilation of their dicta. And there are versions that have “from him” in the text. Midrash Shmuel writes in the name of the Rashbatz that this version is the most accurate, provided its authenticity can be established.

Yose ben Yoezer says, "May your house be a meeting house for Sages": It means to say, a house that the sages will gather there when they need to speak, one with the other. And this can only be in the house of a great and important man. As were it in the house of a lesser man, when they would say to the sage to go there, perhaps he would not want, since [for] him, 'a base one is disgraceful in his eyes; and he does not honor those that fear the Lord.'

"May your house be a meeting place for the sages": When the sages wish to gather together or to meet, let your house be ready for this purpose, so that they will become accustomed to saying "Let us gather at so and so’s house." For it is not possible that you will not learn some bit of wisdom from them. They stated allegorically," To what can this be compared? To one who entered a perfumer’s shop; though he did not purchase anything, in any case he soaked up a good scent and brought it out with him. "

Yose ben Yoezer (a man) of Zeredah and Yose ben Yohanan [a man] of Jerusalem received [the oral tradition] from them [i.e. Shimon the Righteous and Antigonus]. Yose ben Yoezer used to say: let thy house be a house of meeting for the Sages and sit in the very dust of their feet, and drink in their words with thirst. Yose ben Yoezer encourages Jews to make their own homes into a place for the gathering of Sages. One should sit at the dust of their feet, which reflects the custom of the day whereby the Sage would sit on a chair and the disciple would sit at his feet. At this time period in history fixed study halls such existed in later times, especially in Babylonia during the late Talmudic period, did not yet exist. Learning the Oral Torah was performed (recited and not read) in small “disciple circles”, usually centered around a charismatic leader who would be the teacher. When the leader passed away the center of learning often moved to wherever the new leader was located. Yose ben Yoezer is encouraging people to make their homes open to the Sages, to turn them into places of learning, so that these disciple circles can exist there. When Yose ben Yoezer says “drink in their words with thirst” he is comparing the Torah to water, a common comparison in rabbinic literature. Just as water can eventually wear down rock, Torah learning eventually can seep into the hardened minds of human beings, even those who have never before learned.

AND SEAT YOURSELF IN THE DUST AT THEIR FEET. Rav writes, in the alternate explanation he offers: that you should sit on the earth at their feet, as their custom was that the master would sit on a bench and the students would sit at his feet on the ground. This does not contradict his comments on the mishna in Sotah 9:15 that until the death of Rabban Gamliel they would study Torah standing,¹⁹Rabban Gamliel came much later, as is clear from later in this chapter. for here the mishna simply means to say that if they chose to sit, the custom was that the master would sit on a bench and the students would sit on the earth at his feet. Neither does the mishna in Sotah mean that it was forbidden for them to sit and that they would only study standing, only that there was great vigor then and that they would learn while standing in honor of the Torah. And the mishna here delineates what the custom was should it happen that they would sit, as for instance when they spent long hours in the study hall.
Or, alternatively, we can answer using Rava’s approach to the contradiction between the verse “And I sat on the mountain” (Deut. 9:9) and the verse “And I stood on the mountain” (Deut. 10:10) in Megillah 21a. Rava there explains that for things that were easier to grasp, Moses would stand, and for things that were harder to grasp, Moses would sit. And these students are certainly no better than Moses learning from the Almighty.

"become dirty in the dust of their feet": That he treat them with honor, as it was their way to stand in front of the sage. And some of them would sit on benches in the house of study and some of them would sit in front of them on the floor at the dust of their feet, as they said (Chullin 54a), "All the days that that student apprenticed in sitting, I apprenticed in standing." And this is what he stated: Be honored among all of the creatures, but honor the sages.

"and become dirty in the dust of their feet": Which is to say that you should walk behind them, for one who walks about raises dust with his feet, and one who walks behind him is filled with the dust which [the former] raises with his feet. Another explanation: That you should sit at their feet on the ground. For so were they accustomed, that the master sits on a bench and the students sit at his feet on the ground.

THIRSTILY. Rav: like a thirsty man drinking to sate himself, not like a sated man who has no desire for food and turns down even delicacies and sweets. So also Rashi. It seems that their version read ketzamei, “like a thirsty man,” with a kaf,²⁰Meaning “like a thirsty man,” as opposed to betzama, with a beit, which would mean “with thirst.” The words tzama, “thirst,” and tzamei, “thirsty man, one who is thirsting” have the same consonontal spelling: צמא. As the texts were all written without vowels, the word is ambiguous without a prefix. If the prefix is beit, which is adverbial and would mean “with” in this case, the word is בצמא and must be vocalized betzama, “with thirst.” If the prefix is kaf, which means “like,” then the word is כצמא and must be vocalized ketzamei, “as a thirsty man.” The confusion among the texts arose because of the similarity of the letters beit ב and kaf כ. and in fact Midrash Shmuel quotes R. Yosef ibn Nahmias saying: in a Jerusalemite edition of the entire Mishna the text reads ketzamei with a kaf; both versions mean the same thing: that you should drink up their words with the same desire a thirsty man has to drink water.

"and drink their words thirstily": And this is like it is stated (Proverbs 27:7), "A sated person disdains honey, but to a hungry man anything bitter seems sweet." The soul of one who is sated from words of Torah and does not desire them will disdain them - even if they tell him pearls of Torah. But one who is hungry for them, and desires to hear them, will find them sweet in his mouth and will be happy about it - even if he is told something without an explanation - since he knows that it is true, as his teacher said it.

"and drink their words thirstily": Like a thirsty person who drinks to his fill, and not like a satiated person who abhors his food, who loathes even pleasing and good things.