The Sages taught: There was an incident involving Rabbi Yochanan ben Beroka and Rabbi Elazar ben Chisma, when they went to greet Rabbi Yehoshua in Peki’in. Rabbi Yehoshua said to them: What novel idea was taught today in the study hall? They said to him: We are your students and we drink from your water. He said to them: Even so, there cannot be a study hall without a novelty. He asked them: Whose week was it? It was Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya’s week. And on what subject was the lecture today? They said to him: He spoke about the portion of assembly. And what verse did he interpret homiletically with regard to this mitzva? “Assemble the people, the men and the women and the little ones” (Deuteronomy 31:12). If men come to learn, and women come to hear, why do the little ones come? in order for God to give a reward to those who bring them. Rabbi Yehoshua said to them: This good pearl of wisdom was in your hands, and you tried to conceal it from me?
And there, with regard to the mitzva of assembly, from where do we derive that a deaf person and a mute are exempt? As it is written there: “That they may hear, and that they may learn” (Deuteronomy 31:12), and it is taught in a baraita that the phrase “that they may hear” excludes one who speaks but does not hear; and the phrase “and that they may learn” excludes one who hears but does not speak, as he is unable to learn. The Gemara asks: Is that to say that one who is not able to speak is not able to learn? But consider the following incident. There were two mute people who were in the neighborhood of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi. They were the sons of the daughter of Rabbi Yochanan ben Gudgeda, and some say that they were the sons of the sister of Rabbi Yochanan ben Gudgeda. Whenever Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi would enter the study hall they would also enter and sit before the Sages, and they would nod their heads as if they understood and move their lips. And Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi prayed for God to have mercy upon them, and they were healed. And it was discovered that they had learned and were proficient in halakha, i.e., Mishna; Sifra, the halakhic midrash on Leviticus; Sifrei, the halakhic midrash on Numbers and Deuteronomy; and the entire Talmud. This shows that those who cannot speak are able to learn. Mar Zutra said that one should read into the verse: That they may teach [yelamdu], instead of: “That they may learn [yilmedu]” (Deuteronomy 31:12). Even if a mute person is able to learn he cannot teach others. Rav Ashi said that the verse is certainly to be read: That they may teach. As, if it enters your mind that one should read: “That they may learn,” as it is written, and you will explain that since he is not able to speak he is not able to learn, and similarly the reason for the exemption of a deaf person is that since he is not able to hear he is not able to learn, you will have erred. According to this interpretation, it is clear from the context that a deaf person is exempted by the phrase: “That they may hear,” not merely due to his lack of hearing but because his inability to hear prevents him from learning. However, this is incorrect, for if so, this exemption of a mute could also be derived from: “That they may hear,” as the verse has already taught the basic principle that anyone who cannot learn is not obligated in the mitzva of assembly. Rather, the verse is certainly to be read as: “That they may teach,” which indicates that although a mute is able to learn himself, and therefore he is not exempted by the previous verse, he is nevertheless exempt because he is unable to teach others.
Hakhel and the Revelation at Sinai by David Silverberg
One issue impacted by Maimonides’ theory is the scope of the obligation, the question of to whom it applies. In the passage cited above, Maimonides very emphatically extends the obligation to hakhel to even “proselytes who do not understand.” On the surface, this would appear to include all Jews, even those who do not even understand Hebrew. The Mishna in Masekhet Sota 32a establishes that the Torah reading at hakhel was conducted specifically in Hebrew, and thus those unfamiliar with Biblical Hebrew would not gain any new knowledge by attending. Several centuries after Maimonides, a famous scholar named Rabbi Aryeh Leib of Metz (often known by the name of his magnum opus, Sha’agat Aryeh), in his Talmudic commentary Turei Even (Chagiga 2a), ridiculed such a notion. He rejected out of hand the possibility of including in the hakhel obligation those who would not understand any of the reading. A later writer, Rabbi Shemuel Shtrashon of Vilna, in his glosses to the Turei Even (and in his Hagahot Ha-Rashash to Masekhet Chagiga), noted that Maimonides appears to have held differently. He includes under the mitzva of hakhel even the newcomer who has yet to master Biblical Hebrew, for whom the public reading will be of no concrete educational value.
These two views reflect two vastly different approaches to the fundamental nature of hakhel. The Turei Even perceived it as primarily an educational experience, a mandatory, nationwide Torah study session. Naturally, then, a person who could not possibly follow the reading is exempt. Maimonides, by contrast, understood hakhel as a reenactment of Ma’amad Har Sinai, where the entire nation stood as one to collectively receive and accept the divine law. Neither general intellectual talent nor Hebrew language proficiency was necessary to attend Ma’amad Har Sinai; the covenant was established between the Almighty and the Jewish people in its entirety. The septennial reenactment of this experience thus likewise does not discriminate between different academic classes, and even the new proselyte as yet unfamiliar with the material read at hakhel must be in attendance.
Parshat Vayelech Hitbodedut Versus Hakhel by Rabbi Atara Cohen 2019
Hakhel, the long-awaited Torah experience, must happen in community because we can do divine work most effectively with others. By cultivating my love for even my not-so-great neighbor, I must seek out the good in her and lead her back towards goodness. Notably, the Meor V’Shemesh’s example of how I can improve others is to “teach them to love each other.” Love for one another is the prerequisite for proper Torah engagement. Even if I think that I am so good, that I can learn better on my own, that my lonely spiritual wanderings are so powerful, I am actually lesser without others. My love for my fellow Jew is far more important than feeling the most intense warm and fuzzy God feelings.