[1] I have already noted that this passage was cited in order to explain from it the greatness of the Torah — that "it gives life to those who fulfill it" in the World to Come. Yet one who studies the matter carefully may raise objections and pose questions regarding this passage:

[2] The first question concerns the need for this story that he told: "Once I was walking on the road and [a certain man] encountered me," etc. For it would appear that this detail is superfluous — what difference does it make to us whether this exchange took place on the road or in a city? It would have been sufficient simply to say: "Once, a man said to me, 'Would you like to dwell among us?'" etc.

[3] Second — what is the significance of his saying "I was *walking* (*mehalech*) along the road"? He should have said *holech* ("going"), as it is written (Bereshit 18:16): "And Avraham *went* (*holech*) with them to escort them," and regarding Bilam: "And the anger of Hashem was kindled because *he was going* (*holech*)" (Bamidbar 22:22). Why, then, did he choose the expression *mehalech*?

[4] A third question: What is the significance of the statement, "He greeted me and I returned his greeting"? For this detail is not essential to the matter at hand, nor is it the crux of the story. Moreover, Rabbi Yosi should have been the one to greet him first, for this was one of the celebrated virtues of the earlier Sages — that no person ever preceded them in offering a greeting.

[5] A fourth point — it appears that the man asked a reasonable question, yet Rabbi Yosi did not answer him properly. For the man asked him: from what place do you come? — and he replied: from a great city of sages and scribes. But what does it matter to the man whether the city is small or great, whether it is populated by sages or by common folk, since he asked only about the place, and Rabbi Yosi did not address that at all?

[6] The fifth question concerns his saying: "that you will dwell with us in our place, and I will give you" etc. For why did he say "with us and in our place," when it would have sufficed to say "with us" alone, or "in our place" alone? And furthermore, if he was speaking in the plural — "with us, in our place" — how did he then shift to the singular, saying "and *I* will give you"? He should have said "and we will give you."

[7] Sixth — in his response: "If you give me" etc. For who told him that his [Lavan's] place was not a place of Torah? It would have been fitting to respond: if your place is a place of Torah, I will do as you say, and if not, then even though "you give me all the silver" etc.

[8] Seventh — even granting that the people of that place were not Torah scholars, had they chosen Rabbi Yosi to disseminate Torah among them and to learn from him, why should he not dwell in their midst in order to bring merit to the many — thereby fulfilling the ideal of being among "the disciples of Aharon, loving peace and pursuing peace, loving all creatures and drawing them close to Torah"?

[9] Eighth — If Rabbi Yosi was spurning his place of residence on the grounds that nothing accompanies a person at the time of his departure from this world except Torah and good deeds, why then did his decree not state, "I will not dwell in a place [devoid] of Torah and good deeds"? Yet you will find that he mentioned only Torah alone, when he said: "but rather in a place of Torah" — and he made no stipulation whatsoever regarding good deeds.

[10] Ninth — the proof he brought does not speak at all about silver and gold that "are not lent to a person [at the time of his death]," which is the very foundation of his initial premise. He should rather have cited for this point the verse (Tehillim 49:17–18): "Fear not when a man grows rich… his glory shall not descend after him."

[11] Tenth — that even the proof he brought from the verse (Mishlei 6:22), "When you walk, it shall guide you," makes no mention of the good deeds that he cited in connection with that guidance. Consequently, his proof fails to substantiate the majority of the fundamental premises he established in his words.

[12] The eleventh [difficulty]: from the verse he expounded — "When you walk, it shall guide you" (Mishlei 6:22) — referring to this world, it would follow that the ultimate purpose of the Torah and its reward also applies in this world. This, however, does not accord with the intent of Rabbi Yosi, who taught that nothing accompanies a person at the time of his passing. For one might argue: [the verse] was needed [only] to speak of this world.

[13] The twelfth [matter] concerns what he expounded on the verse (Mishlei 6:22): "When you lie down, it shall watch over you" — in the grave. For what manner of protection is it that the body would have in the grave — whether that worms and maggots should not consume it, or that it be spared the punishment of the grave — there is no doubt that this alone cannot account for the full reward of Torah?

[14] The thirteenth — in what he expounded: "and when you awaken, it shall speak with you — לָעוֹלָם הַבָּא, in the World to Come". The commentators explained: "this 'it shall speak with you'" — means it shall converse with you. But what is the nature of this reward, that the Torah will converse with him in the World to Come? All the more so that there is neither conversation nor speech there. It would have been better for him to say: it shall elevate you or it shall exalt you.

[15] The fourteenth [difficulty]: that this homiletical interpretation cannot be reconciled with the view of the Rambam, nor with the view of the Ramban, may their memories be for a blessing. According to the Rambam, who interprets "upon him, peace" as referring to the World of Souls — how can the verse say of it "and you shall awaken"? For death is associated with sleep, as it is stated (Iyov 3:13): "I would have slept, then would I have had rest" — not with waking. And according to the Ramban, who holds that the World to Come refers to the resurrection of the dead, it is very difficult: how could Rabbi Yosi, in his homily, have mentioned something from the World of Souls and then skipped from the grave all the way to the resurrection of the dead, without mentioning anything of what will befall the soul during that intervening period of time?

[16] The fifteenth [question concerns] the other verses he cited. First — regarding the verse he brought (Tehillim 119:72): "The Torah of Your mouth is better to me than thousands of gold and silver." For relations of comparison — lesser and greater — can only apply to things that fall under the same category. Now the Torah is something apprehended by the intellect within the soul, whereas gold and silver are inanimate, sensory objects. How, then, can a relationship of comparison exist between them? Similarly, regarding the verse (Chagai 2:8): "The silver is Mine and the gold is Mine" — it appears that this verse serves no purpose in this context, given the subject matter of the derasha.

[17] The commentary explains the Baraita and resolves the questions as follows: Rabbi Yosi ben Kisma, in the depth of his wisdom, followed the practice of the early sages to speak and reveal truths through parables and riddles. He therefore framed his discourse around the imagery of walking on a road, in order to convey that a person in this world is like a wayfarer who has stopped to lodge for the night — for from the day of his birth until the day of his death, he is always in motion along this worldly path upon which he travels. Just as in every movement and journey one can identify three boundaries — the point of origin from which one departs, the destination toward which one travels, and the path through which the movement occurs — so too, along the path of this world, three corresponding boundaries can be identified in a person: the boundary of his origin, which is a putrid drop and his mother's womb, as well as the supernal dwelling from which his soul was hewn; and the boundary of his destination, which is to come before the palace of the King, Hashem of Hosts, to enter His sanctuary, to stand before Him, and to be bound up in the bond of life.

[18] The intermediate boundary that lies between these two extremes encompasses all the intermediate states and actions that a person performs throughout his life as provisions for his journey, in order to reach that longed-for ultimate purpose. For it is the road, and these are the passages through which he travels toward his desired destination, where his rest shall be found. From this perspective, this world is called by the name "a road," and a person's life and deeds are described as "walking, movement, and going about." It is said (Bereshit 5:22): "And Chanoch walked with God." Of Noach (ibid. 6:9): "Noach walked with God." Of Avraham (ibid. 17:1): "Walk before Me and be wholehearted." And it says (ibid. 18:19): "For I have known him, so that he will instruct his children and his household after him, and they shall keep the way of Hashem, to do righteousness and justice." Yaakov said (ibid. 48:15): "The God before Whom my fathers walked." Yitro too said to Moshe (Shemot 18:20): "And you shall make known to them the way in which they shall walk." The master of all prophets said (Devarim 28:9): "And you shall walk in His ways." And since all of a person's life and deeds, whether good or evil, are called "ways," the prophet found it necessary to distinguish between them, saying (Hoshea 14:10): "For the ways of Hashem are straight, and the righteous walk in them," and so forth. King Dovid, peace be upon him, said (Tehillim 1:6): "For Hashem knows the way of the righteous," and by contrast, "but the way of the wicked shall perish." For there are ways that are straight — those directed squarely toward the place to which a person is heading, bringing him there — and there are crooked ways that do not lead him there, but rather distance him from that boundary and purpose, for they are ways directed toward other ends. Therefore Dovid said (Tehillim 119:1): "Praiseworthy are those whose way is wholehearted, who walk in the Torah of Hashem." And he said of himself (Melachim I 2:2): "I am going the way of all the earth." Shlomo said (Mishlei 20:7): "The righteous man walks in his integrity," and of the opposite he said (ibid. 14:12): "There is a way that seems straight before a man, but its end is the ways of death." With this very intention, the consummate master of parable wrote: "The world is a stormy sea, vast in its depths and broad in its expanse, and time is a rickety bridge built upon it. Its beginning is held by the ropes of the primordial void that preceded all existence, and its end is to behold the delight of the eternal light, to bask in the light of the King's countenance. The breadth of the bridge is but a cubit, and even its railings are gone — and you, O son of man, whether you will it or not, you are alive and crossing it always, from the day you became a man," and so on. In keeping with this parable and this insight, Rabbi Yosi ben Kisma said: "Once I was mehalech [traveling]" — to allude to this world, which is the road of life. He therefore used the word mehalech rather than holech, to convey that he was continuously in motion, perpetually moving along his path. With this, the first two questions have been resolved.

[19] And he mentions that a man encountered him — meaning that a person engaged in the affairs of this temporal world happened upon him: one who, being a man of the land, toils to grow wealthy and to acquire honor and status, for such is the end of all mankind, fashioned from the earth. Or alternatively, this too belongs to the allegorical dimension, hinting at the practical intellect — that while Rabbi Yosi was on his way and had not turned his heart to idle matters but was rather engaged in his Mishnah study and absorbed in solitary contemplation, this figure roused him with these arguments. He further mentions that that man — or the practical intellect within him — hastened to greet him first with shalom, for since Rabbi Yosi was withdrawn in his contemplation, he had not rushed to extend the greeting first. The meaning of this is that that man — or the practical intellect — upon seeing him withdrawn in solitary contemplation and distant from him, offered him shalom, as though to say: "Let there be no strife between us on account of our different orientations and inclinations; let us make peace between us and become as one." And Rabbi Yosi returned that greeting, as if to say: "I too desire this — that you and I become as one." With this, the third question is resolved.

[20] And recall that at that moment the man — or the practical faculty speaking within him — said to him: "Rabbi, from what place are you?" It would be wrong to suppose that he was asking about the name of a geographical location, for what would it matter to him whether the answer were Yavneh or Chevron? Rather, he was asking about his spiritual level, in the manner of designating it by the term "place," as the Sages say: "the difficulty still stands in its place," or "he fills the place of his fathers" — and as the Moreh (Rambam) explained the equivocal use of the term "place." It is as though he said to him: "Make known to me, I pray, your ways and your level — whether you are purely theoretical, or engaged in practical civic affairs shared with other people, or composed of both." To this he answered: "From a great city of scholars and scribes." That is to say: the city in which I engage in contemplation is a city great unto God, and the name of that city is "from the day of Hashem it was called so," for it is the nature of all-encompassing existence; and in that city there is nothing but scholars and scribes. For some among them are scholars through their speculative inquiry and investigation by word of mouth, and some through written works. To these two levels he alluded when he said "of scholars and of scribes." Then that man — or the practical intellect within me — roused me, instructed me, and said to me: "Would you be willing to dwell with us in our place?" He did not say "is it your opinion" but rather "would you be willing," because he was asking about will as it corresponds to desire, as if to say: "Is it your wish and your will to dwell with us?" That is to say: that your occupation should be in civic matters, in our affairs and our business — and "dwelling" means that all your contemplation and thought should be directed toward us and withdrawn from Torah, not merely occasionally but permanently and as a fixed abode, as people who abandon eternal life and occupy themselves with the life of the fleeting moment. This is why he added: "in our place" — meaning, at our level, doing everything that we do here — namely, that you should manage the affairs of our property and our commerce. It appears that that man was a partner in a commercial partnership, and accordingly he was engaging him for this purpose, informing him of the wages of his labor in terms of so much silver and so much gold. He phrased the labor owed to them in the plural and the payment of the wages in the singular, because one may act to a person's benefit in his absence, but one may not act to a person's detriment in his absence. He therefore stipulated the labor to be performed for all the partners, while the one speaking with him committed himself to pay the wages, since there was no other party present to offer it to him. And if this statement is attributed to the practical intellect, it was phrased in the plural because all the faculties unite around it, while he said "and I will give you" in the singular, because the acquisition of gain and the gathering of benefit is the function of the practical intellect alone. And since this speech already made it perfectly explicit that he should separate himself and withdraw from the study of Torah and fix his desires and his dwelling upon material, temporal things, Rabbi Yosi therefore replied: "My son — even if you were to give me all the silver and gold in the world, I would dwell nowhere but in a place of Torah." For he called him "my son" because the scholar is as a father to the students who learn from him; and if this were the statement of the practical intellect, it addressed the soul as a whole as "my son," since it is one of its parts and one of its faculties. Observe that he did not say "I will not sit" but rather "I will not dwell." That is to say: since you ask that I dwell in permanent residence with you in your pursuits and at your level, and withdraw from Torah — I will not establish a permanent fixed dwelling for myself except in a place and at a level where the study of Torah is to be found. For a person walks toward his eternal home, and as I walk toward it I will need nothing but what directs me along my path. You spoke of dwelling — but you erred, for a person has no true dwelling in this world, for he is always on his way. It is well known that at the moment of a person's passing, material things do not accompany him — neither silver nor gold, for his glory does not descend after him. Only Torah and good deeds accompany him. And good deeds cannot truly be good unless they accord with Torah, for the condition of their goodness is not that they conform to intellectual virtue alone, but that they conform to Torah and to the divine commandment. Therefore, when Torah is removed, there can be no good deeds in its place. The fourth question is thus resolved — that Rabbi Yosi answered in accordance with halachah and in keeping with the intent of the question. The fifth question — why he said "with us in our place," and likewise his saying "and I will give you" in the singular — is also resolved. The sixth and seventh questions are likewise resolved, for from the words of the speaker, Rabbi Yosi understood that his intent was to draw him away from Torah and engage him in the life of the fleeting moment, and so he replied accordingly. The eighth question is also resolved — why he said only "I will dwell nowhere but in a place of Torah" — for when Torah is nullified, good deeds are nullified along with it.

[21] Rabbi Yosef brought proof that the endurance and accompaniment into the World to Come comes through Torah and good deeds, and that the Torah is what guides and directs one's deeds — from the words of Shlomo, peace be upon him, in the book of Mishlei. The opening of the verses reads as follows: "Guard, my son, the commandment of your father, and do not forsake the Torah of your mother. Bind them upon your heart always, tie them around your neck. When you walk, it will guide you, etc. For a commandment is a lamp and Torah is light," etc. For here he commanded regarding the mitzvot, which are the good deeds, and regarding the Torah in the first verse — "Bind them upon your heart always, tie them" etc. (Mishlei 6:20–23).

[22] He [Shlomo] explained how we may know which deeds are good — whether they are determined by practical reason, by the consensus of the citizens of the state, or by some other means. Regarding this he said (Mishlei 6:22–24): "When you walk, it shall guide you" — meaning that the Torah will lead and direct him in those deeds, and it is according to the Torah that they will be good, and not in any other way. He therefore further said: "For the mitzvah is a lamp and the Torah is light" — meaning that the mitzvah is like the light of a lamp. Does a lamp give any benefit when its flame is extinguished and there is no light? Likewise, human deeds are of no benefit without Torah, whether that Torah is received through tradition or attained through study. This is the meaning of his further statement: "And the path of life is the rebuke of moral instruction" — that the path toward the acquisition of eternal life is the Torah, in which are found the rebukes of moral instruction, and not without it. He then cautioned that one should distance himself from intellectual inquiry whenever it does not accord with the Torah, since such inquiry possesses no true light — and this is the meaning of his further statement: "To guard you from an evil woman, from the smooth tongue of a strange woman; do not desire her beauty in your heart" etc. Our Sages, of blessed memory, interpreted "For the mitzvah is a lamp and the Torah is light" in a different manner, which I will cite further on. Behold, the verses have been clarified according to their plain meaning, in full accord with the words of the perfect sage. And with this, the ninth and tenth questions have been resolved.

[23] Indeed, he chose to expound this verse because he found within it the language of walking, which pertains to his subject — namely, the phrase "המהלך בדרך" ("one who walks along the way"). He then connected this to the verse "בהתהלכך תנחה אותך — When you walk, it shall guide you" (Mishlei 6:22), and since the verse is composed of three parts, he derived from it three separate teachings. The first part — "When you walk, it shall guide you" — he expounded as referring to this world (Olam Hazeh). His intention was not that the Torah guides a person in this world toward the acquisition of material success, but rather that as a person walks through this world on his journey toward his eternal home, the divine Torah guides him so that he does not stray from the path, and leads him along a straight road toward his desired destination. He further expounded: "When you lie down, it shall watch over you" — as referring to the grave. His meaning here is that the Torah watches over and saves a person from his soul descending into destruction. For the wicked — their souls perish together with their bodies, and they lie together upon the dust; but one who engages in Torah, when at the time of death his body is borne to the grave, his Torah watches over him so that his soul does not descend to the pit as the body does, nor suffer its corruption — following the principle of "Redeem him from descending into the pit" (Iyov 33:24). The third part of the verse — "And when you awaken, it shall speak with you" — he expounded as referring to the World to Come (Olam Haba). Thus, he expounded the first part of the verse as referring to this world, the second part as referring to the day of death, and the third part as referring to what comes after death.

[24] You already know that there is a dispute among our Sages regarding what is meant by the term "the World to Come." According to the view of the Rambam, that it is the world of souls, it is appropriate to interpret this homily as follows: the divine Torah in this world directs and shows the straight path for attaining the success of the soul, and on the day of death it will save and protect the soul from the grave — which is an allusion to decay and destruction. Beyond this, it further benefits one by acquiring great spiritual reward, since the soul of a boor and a fool will dwell in its eternal abode like a silent Rachel. However, the soul that has occupied itself with Torah — it is the Torah that acts on behalf of that soul, causing it to converse before its Creator and offer its songs before Him. Thus, the Torah is the cause of its speech, and it is for this reason that the verse states: "she shall speak for you." You already know that the conversation and speech of souls is entirely a metaphor for the delight of their comprehension and their pleasure in their attained insights. Now, the verse says of the soul in the world of souls: "and when you awaken" — because just as the term "sleep" is borrowed to describe the body in the grave, so too is "awakening" said of the soul in its Gan Eden, to declare that it perceives and feels its reward and is not like a lifeless corpse. One should not be surprised that the term "awakening" is used in reference to something upon which sleep does not apply, for this is figurative language. So too is it said of Him, blessed is He: "Stir Yourself and awake to my judgment, my God and my Lord, to my cause" (Tehillim 35:23). According to this view of the Rambam, then, this homily encompasses nothing other than this physical world, the spiritual World to Come, and the day of death — which is what separates between them.

[25] However, most of the Rabbis maintained and accepted that the word olam in their language, of blessed memory, refers only to the resurrection of the dead. According to their view, the verse should be interpreted as follows: "and when you awaken" (Daniel 12:2) — referring to the resurrection, as it is written, "and many who sleep in the dust of the earth shall awaken." For they expounded: "when you walk, it shall guide you" — as referring to this world; "and when you lie down, it shall watch over you" — meaning, while the body lies in the grave, the Torah will watch over your soul, and this watching takes place in the supernal Gan Eden, for the soul will be there, prepared in every way and guarded while the body remains in the grave, until it rises at the resurrection. And they further expounded: "and when you awaken, it shall speak for you" — at the resurrection of the dead, for it is then that people will come to judgment, and the Torah will speak on behalf of a person and advocate for him. In Sha'ar HaGemul, Ramban recorded this same exposition in a somewhat different form: "when you walk, it shall guide you" — in this world; "when you lie down" — it shall watch over you in the grave; "and when you awaken" — at the days of Mashiach, it shall speak for you in the World to Come.

[26] In all the books available to me, I have not found that variant reading in the words of Rabbi Yosi ben Kisma — only the version I cited above. The commentators likewise cite it in that same form. Proof that this is the authentic reading comes from the Tanchuma on the parashah of Ki Teitzei LaMilchama (Devarim 20:1): "For they are a graceful wreath for your head" — this refers to the Torah; "When you walk, it will guide you" — in this world; "When you lie down, it will watch over you" — in the grave; "And when you awaken, it will speak for you" — in the World to Come. In the Midrash Rabbah, however, this same exposition appears in a different form. There it is said: "When you walk, it will guide you" — at the time when a person is engaged in Torah study during his lifetime; "When you lie down, it will watch over you" — for it guards him from decay and worms; "And when you awaken, it will speak for you" — when all arise for judgment, it will serve as his advocate and argue in his favor. Thus they have explained both parts of the verse in accordance with my own interpretation, rendering "And when you awaken, it will speak for you" as referring to the Day of Judgment. Ramban holds this refers to the resurrection of the dead, while Rambam holds it refers to the judgment the soul undergoes upon its departure from the body. Furthermore, in the chapter of Hayah Noteil (Sotah 21a), this exposition also appears: "For a mitzvah is a lamp and Torah is light" — Rabbi Menachem son of Rabbi Yosi expounded this verse: Scripture compares the mitzvah to a lamp and the Torah to light, to tell you that just as light illuminates the world, so too Torah protects the world; and just as a lamp gives light only for a time, so too a mitzvah affords protection only for a time. And it says: "When you walk, it will guide you" — in this world; "When you lie down, it will watch over you" — this is the day of death; "And when you awaken, it will speak for you" — this refers to the World to Come. A parable: A man was walking in the pitch darkness of night, fearful of thorns, of thistles, of pitfalls, of wild beasts, and of bandits, and he did not know which path to take. A torch of light came his way — he was saved from the thorns, the thistles, and the pitfalls, yet he was still afraid of the wild beasts and the bandits, and still did not know which path to follow. When he reached a crossroads, he was saved from them all. What is the meaning of "crossroads"? A Torah scholar, and the day of death. — End of citation. And you will observe how many peculiarities there are in this parable, and how difficult it is to reconcile it with the lesson it is meant to illustrate.

[27] It seems to me that this sage first interpreted: "For a mitzvah is a lamp and Torah is light" (Mishlei 6:23) — the lamp, meaning that which illuminates the mitzvah, while the Torah is on the level of the light of the sun, not the light of a lamp. And because he said that the Torah protects the world just as light illuminates the world, he brought the exposition: "When you walk, it shall guide you" — referring to this world; "when you lie down, it shall watch over you" — referring to the day of death. From this, the truth of what I explained regarding Rabbi Yosi's interpretation concerning the grave will become clear: the intention is that on the day of death, the Torah will guard his soul so that it does not die as the body dies. And he expounded: "And when you awaken, it shall speak with you" — referring to the World to Come. In accordance with what he explained by means of the parable, it is fitting to interpret this as referring to the World of Souls, which is the future world that comes after death, as the Rambam holds. He therefore brought the parable of a man walking in the pitch darkness of night — an allusion to this world, which is a realm of deep shadow and disorder, where a person is forever in motion toward whatever he moves toward. And because a person's encounters and mishaps in this world are many, he is fearful — whether of thorns, briers, or pits that may inflict upon his body a wound, a bruise, or a fresh blow — all of which are allusions to the physical evils that pertain to the body. And how apt is the mention of "thorns," by which one feels disgust, and "briers," which alludes to financial loss and the forfeiture of one's possessions, from which one emerges utterly stripped — and likewise the "pits," which allude to the death and burial of one's children — for all of this pertains to the body.

[28] He further said that one has another fear — of wild beasts and bandits who might come to hunt his soul and take it away. These are an allusion to the punishments of Gehinnom and the suffering and ruin of the soul. Moreover, beyond this, he did not know which path he was traveling — that is to say, whether it was a straight path by which he would be saved from these physical and spiritual dangers, or the opposite. Then a torch of light came his way — which is an allusion to a mitzvah — and it saved him from the thorns, thistles, and pits, which represent physical evils. Yet he still feared the remaining evils, which are spiritual, and he did not know whether his path would save him from them. He dwelt continually in this doubt and in this fear all the days of his life, until he would arrive at a crossroads — for then he would know whether he had walked a straight path or not, and would no longer fear those evils that he had feared. The matter of the crossroads is a profound parable: when a person parts his ways and sets his path with integrity in the Torah of Hashem, separating himself from the evil path — which has no Torah — that separation removes his fear of spiritual punishments and informs him that his path is pure and upright. And this is what is meant by the question: "What is the crossroads?" — a Torah scholar; that is to say, through his wisdom and Torah he teaches one to distinguish between the paths. And if the Torah together with the Torah scholar does not guide him in this, then the day of death — which is itself a crossroads, the parting from the path of the living to the path of the dead — when one arrives at it, he will know which path he had been walking, whether it was good or evil, and it will remove from him the fear of punishments; for in actuality he will be saved from them if he was a man of Torah, or he will be ensnared in their corruption if he was not. Thus, the Torah scholar through his Torah study is the crossroads in this world, as it is written: "When you walk, it shall guide you" — and if there is no Torah and no Torah scholars, there is no one to teach him, protect him, and reveal the truth to him, except the day of death. It is apparent, then, from this exposition that the intent was directed not toward the resurrection of the dead, but rather toward the World of Souls. And all of this is consistent with the words of Rabbi Yosi ben Kisma. With this, questions 11, 12, 13, and 14 are resolved.

[29] Rabbi Yosef further cited another verse (Tehillim 119:71-72) — "Good for me is the Torah of Your mouth" — to indicate that one had already preceded him who had spurned silver and gold when they stood as an obstacle to Torah study, and said: "It is good for me that I was afflicted, so that I might learn Your statutes; the Torah of Your mouth is better to me than thousands of gold and silver." For here he set forth the two extremes of wealth and poverty, saying: it is good for me to sit in affliction and have no bread to eat, provided that I learn Your statutes — for goodness and perfection are bound up with Torah. And the mem of me'alfei zahav va'kesef ("than thousands of gold and silver") is not, in my view, a mem of comparison, but rather a mem of exchange and substitution. The author of the Afikoman already mentioned this usage in chapter thirteen of his work, citing as an example (Shoftim 5:11) — "from the sound of the archers between the watering-places" — for in place of and in exchange for the voice of the archers, now "they shall recount the righteous acts of Hashem." Similarly (Tehillim 107:17): "Fools, because of the path of their transgressions and their iniquities, were afflicted" — meaning: in exchange for the path of transgressions and iniquities they had been committing, they shall now be afflicted. And this verse — "Good for me is the Torah of Your mouth" — means: in exchange for the gold and silver that people seek, the Torah is a most precious exchange in my eyes. Now, since the Sages, may their memory be a blessing, taught that a person ought to study Torah only for its own sake and not for the purpose of acquiring wealth or honor, and that wealth and honor will come of themselves from Hashem, may He be blessed — for He does not abandon His devoted ones — even though one does not direct his study toward that end; and as it is stated in the Tanchuma on the verse "to love Hashem your God" (Devarim 11:13) — study Torah in any case, and in the end honor will come. Therefore Rabbi Yosef concluded by citing (Chagai 2:8): "Mine is the silver and Mine is the gold, says Hashem of Hosts" — meaning: it is fitting for a person to act in accordance with the words of Dovid, and in accordance with the teaching of Rabbi Yosef ben Kisma, to study Torah for its own sake and to cast his burden upon Hashem, for His is the silver and His is the gold to give him. And with this, the final question has been resolved, and this baraita has been fully and completely explained.