206 —השפעת אמירת שמועות תורה בעולם הזה ובעולם הבא

B"H, Wednesday, 15 Teves, 5706.

To the honorable Haraha"g vavaha"ch iy"a chov"v etc. Moreinu HaRav Mordechai David sheyichyeh.

Shalom u'Vrachah!

In response to your letter:

a) You understood from my letter that I wish to explain that by quoting a teaching said in this world, the soul of the author learns at that moment in the Yeshivah Shel Maalah (Heavenly Academy). You pointed out that mentioning the teaching only benefits "his lips move in the grave," but that his soul being present in the Heavenly Academy is a separate matter, which comes because he studied Torah during his lifetime, and is unrelated to quoting his teaching now. I did not find any reason in your letter compelling you to make this distinction. My opinion remains as before. And if you wish: pshat (simple meaning), sevara (logic), and from our Sages. Pshat: The simple explanation in our topic is that by quoting a teaching in his name it accomplishes: a) he dwells; b) he dwells in both worlds. However, to dwell in one world can also be achieved through other means (in this world literally, and in the World to Come through Torah and mitzvos performed during life), whereas quoting his teaching helps for both worlds at once. Sevara: If quoting his Torah teaching causes his lips to move in the grave, then certainly it should also benefit his soul—which is primarily what learns Torah (except when there is an evil inclination between you—see Shabbos 89a)—that it too will be "moving" then. From our Sages: In Bechoros (31b)—which I referenced previously—it seems "in both worlds" means: In this world refers to the lips of the one saying the teaching; in the World to Come refers to the lips of he whose name is mentioned; and from here we learn for other commentators who explain "I will dwell in both worlds," i.e., specifically through this very teaching. If you say that dwelling in the World to Come happens regardless and is not dependent on quoting his teaching now, it is unclear why Tosafos Yevamos (96b) says "in the Heavenly Academy," rather than simply "in the World to Come." It must be that as a reward for having learned Torah previously, and by repeating his teaching now this matter is reawakened—thus mitzvah brings another mitzvah; as its essence so is its reward—that he is now seated in the Heavenly Academy. See also what our Sages say as brought in Chinuch L'Na'ar p.22: when something good happens due to a deceased person’s influence, he receives reward—and from son we learn for student.

b) Regarding your attempt to distinguish between two analogies about "his lips move..." found in Yerushalmi (Berachos ch.2 halachah 1 etc.), whether it refers to old wine or konditon (spiced wine), and whether they argue about which type of teaching causes this effect—one referring to inner Torah teachings and one only to revealed or pilpul—this needs further analysis for several reasons: a) Either way, they should have explained that only such teachings are emphasized; b) In Yevamos and Bechoros Rabbi Yochanan and Rabbi Shimon refer to revealed teachings and were strict about them—even dying over them—and according to those who say it's like old wine all this would be pointless; c) Konditon is wine with honey and pepper (Pesikta D'Rav Kahana ch. B'Chodesh HaShlishi as cited by Aruch), and when dividing all of Torah generally honey refers to hidden aspects as stated Chagigah (13a–14b); d) In Yerushalmi Shekalim end ch.2 it explains further: "What benefit does he get? Like one who drinks konditon versus one who drinks aged wine." According to your explanation there’s no meaning here. In my view: In every teaching quoted—whether revealed or hidden—there’s an essential part with fixed measure, and pilpul within it which has no limit (see at length Kuntres Acharon Hilchos Talmud Torah ch.3 by Admor Hazaken). The Yerushalmi should be understood simply: It asks what benefit does the author get when he himself repeats his old teaching again? The answer—as explained elsewhere regarding Mishnah vs Gemara—is: One says like konditon—that each time he reviews his teaching anew at Yeshivah Shel Maalah he finds new intellects and ideas as above regarding pilpul; another says like aged wine—old Mishnah—even after much time he still senses pleasure from its taste even with old logic. See Kehillas Yaakov on Yerushalmi Shekalim and introduction to Emek Sheilah by Maharim D'Arnstipel who explains differences between these analogies—this too needs further analysis but not for now.

With blessings for immediate teshuvah and immediate redemption.

Summary

The Rebbe teaches that mentioning a Torah scholar's teachings brings merit not only by causing “his lips move” metaphorically but actually elevates their soul above—even after passing—by reawakening their spiritual accomplishments through ongoing study.