The teaching of Ben Zoma

Judaism, Wntr, 1993 by Mordecai Roshwald

The rabbinical stance clearly expresses a strong concern for social morality. Ben Zoma's dictum, while in one sense expressing a factual statement, a common sense reflection on social relations -- the honoured man is he who honours other people -- in another way makes an ethical statement. This point can be further substantiated by the interpretation of the maxim itself. For the Hebrew word, mekhubad, can be translated as "honoured" as well as "honourable." Thus, the maxim could read: "Who is an honourable man? He who honours |other~ people." A man who honours other people is honourable, he deserves to be honoured. He does not merely choose an expedient way for attaining honour for himself by respecting his fellow men. He takes the right path, and, thereby, deserves moral approval. He ought to be honoured.

The sayings of Ben Zoma, not unlike those of some of the other tannaim, while terse and seemingly simple, are open to interpretation and discussion. The elusive meaning of mekhubad, signifying both honoured and honourable -- actually, respected and worthy of respect -- is a case in point. The questionable meaning of hero, the elusive satisfaction of riches, the complex nature of wisdom, are all open to reflection and discussion. While Ben Zoma has his point of view, the formulation of his philosophy offers a stimulus to a dialogue and controversy. Whether or not this is intended by him and by some other sages, the argument resulting from the peculiar formulation of the maxim accords with the argumentative character and method of the tannaim and their subsequent Talmudic followers. Engaged in legal interpretation and adjudication, the discussion, argument, and disputation were the very nature of their intellectual activity. Though their philosophical dicta seem to belong to a different category of thinking, these dicta express the thoughts of the same scholars, who, consciously or unwittingly, were disposed, or even eager, to provoke discussion and intellectual argument. For, besides being scholars, they were teachers, and, thus, as much aware of the pedagogical value of the dialogue as Socrates and Plato had been.

Ben Zoma could have conveyed his position by simply stating that wisdom has to be sought not only in books but also culled from ordinary people; that it is paramount to control one's evil impulse; that it is desirable to acquiesce in one's modest but adequate possessions, rather than pursue inordinate riches; that one ought to respect one's fellow beings. Instead, the tanna chose to append his value judgments to a series of controversial definitions of widely admired types and pursuits: wise, heroic, wealthy, and honored (or honorable). This method may well have served a pedagogical purpose. By offering his startling definitions, which contradict the common notions, Ben Zoma intrigues and provokes the scholars and the disciples, and compels the attention of his and future generations to reflect on the issues close to his heart. One may accept these controversial positions or reject them, but, once they are conveyed in his provocative definitions, his point of view and the issue itself cannot be ignored.