לקוטי שיחות חלק כח - חוקת א

At the conclusion of Tractate Megillah, the Gemara states:

“One who holds a Torah scroll bare is buried bare.”

The Gemara asks:

“Could it enter your mind that he is buried literally bare?”

Rather, it explains:

“He is buried bare of mitzvos.”

The Gemara continues:

“Could it enter your mind that he is entirely without mitzvos?”

Rather, Abaye explains:

“He is buried bare of that particular mitzvah.”

Tosafos comments:

“Some explain that this refers to the mitzvah of holding the Torah scroll. This is difficult, for what novelty is there? Obviously he receives no reward since he did not perform the mitzvah properly. Therefore the Ri explains that he loses the reward of the mitzvah performed at that moment. Thus, if he held the Torah scroll bare and read from it, he receives no reward for the reading. Likewise if he held it in order to roll it or correct it. But one who holds it with a mantle merits ‘length of days in its right hand, and in its left hand wealth and honor.’”

The explanation is as follows:

There are three possible ways to understand the status of the Torah mantle (mitpachas):

(1) From the perspective of the person (gavra)

The mantle exists so that a person can hold the Torah scroll properly. Its purpose is primarily practical, enabling the individual to grasp the scroll without directly touching it.

(2) From the perspective of the object (cheftza)

The mantle is an element of the Torah scroll’s honor. The dignity of a Torah scroll requires that it be covered and treated respectfully.

(3) As part of the Torah scroll itself

The mantle is not merely a matter of honor. Rather, it is connected to the very essence of the Torah scroll. In a certain sense, it becomes part of the Torah itself, similar to the margins (gilyon) that accompany the parchment.

This explains the progression of interpretations in the Gemara.

Initially, one might think that the punishment is being “buried bare.” According to this view, the mantle is merely an external garment of the Torah scroll. Therefore the punishment corresponds to the offense: just as he treated the Torah without its covering, he is buried without a covering.

The second interpretation—“bare of mitzvos”—reflects the view that the mantle is part of the Torah’s honor and not merely an external accessory. Therefore the consequence relates to mitzvos, which pertain to the soul rather than external appearance.

The third interpretation—that he is deprived of “that particular mitzvah”—reflects the deepest view, namely that the mantle is connected with the essential sanctity of the Torah scroll itself. Therefore the deficiency affects specifically the mitzvah being performed with the Torah at that moment.

This also explains the opinion cited by Tosafos that the phrase refers to the mitzvah of holding the Torah scroll.

The novelty would be that this case is unlike tearing one’s garment over a deceased relative on Shabbos, where the obligation of mourning is fulfilled despite the Shabbos violation. Here, however, the mitzvah of holding the Torah is not fulfilled at all, because the mantle is not regarded as something separate from the Torah scroll. The deficiency affects the Torah scroll as it is being handled, and therefore the mitzvah itself is lacking.

Tosafos rejects this explanation because, according to the other interpretations, the punishment involves not merely the absence of additional reward but the loss of something that otherwise would have been earned. According to the first explanation, one simply never gains the reward of the mitzvah, but nothing is taken away from him.

Therefore the Ri explains that one who reads from the Torah while holding it improperly loses the reward of the reading itself.

On a deeper level, one may say that according to the Ri, the mantle is connected not only to the Torah scroll but also to the entire function and expression of the Torah scroll, including the public reading of the Torah.

This also explains the Gemara’s conclusion:

“But one who holds it with a mantle merits length of days in its right hand and wealth and honor in its left hand.”

The Sages explain:

“For those who go to the right with it—length of days; for those who go to the left with it—wealth and honor.”

Rashi explains that “those who go to the left” refers to those who study Torah not for its own sake.

However, this cannot mean learning with improper motives altogether, for such study is described elsewhere as a “poison of death.” Rather, it refers to learning Torah in order to know how to act and fulfill the commandments, rather than studying solely for the sake of Torah itself.

This relates directly to the concept of the mantle.

As explained above, the mantle is attached to and associated with the body of the Torah scroll. Learning Torah in order to know how to act is absolutely necessary, yet it remains comparable to a garment—an external expression of Torah rather than Torah’s innermost essence.

Therefore one merits:

• “Length of days in its right hand” — through Torah studied purely for its own sake (lishmah), which connects to the essence of Torah.
• “Wealth and honor in its left hand” — through Torah studied in order to know “the deeds that one should perform,” the practical application of Torah in daily life.

Thus, the discussion of the Torah mantle ultimately highlights the intimate connection between the Torah’s essence, its honor, and the various levels through which a Jew attaches himself to Torah.