The chapter before us continues to deal with the matters of wealth and poverty, and in the verses ahead it touches upon a sensitive point: the power of money to control human beings. Three verses will be explained here as a single unit - "The rich rules over the poor", "He who sows injustice reaps sorrow", and "He who has a generous eye shall be blessed" - and to them we will add the interpretive approaches of Rabbeinu Yonah, the Vilna Gaon, and Rashi, and finally a wondrous approach of the Vilna Gaon regarding Birkat HaMazon.
עָשִׁיר בְּרָשִׁים יִמְשׁוֹל וְעֶבֶד לֹוֶה לְאִישׁ מַלְוֶה׃ - The rich rules over the poor, and the borrower is a servant to the lender.
Rabbeinu Yonah explains that the verse reiterates the theme of wealth mentioned earlier. The poor stand in awe of the rich man because they depend on him. This is reality: why do so many poor people flatter and fawn over the rich? Because perhaps some crumbs will fall their way, perhaps he will find them a job, perhaps he will give them something. Since the poor need him, the rich man rules over them.
And it has already been said, "The lovers of the rich are many, but the poor is separated from his friend." And what is the reason? The lovers of the rich are many, but do not be misled: it is not you they love, but your money. The proof is that the moment that person loses his wealth, Heaven forbid, you immediately see those same "lovers" transfer their affection to whoever received the money. They follow the money; it is not personal. Often the wealthy man becomes confused: "Look how they honor me, look how everyone speaks to me!" Do not be confused: they are not speaking to you, but to your money, and it is the money they honor. Whereas when a person is poor, his friends abandon him.
We have already mentioned previously the verse, "And each of you shall return to his holding, and each of you shall return to his family" - when the Jubilee arrives, land returns to its original owners, and the person returns to his ancestral holding and to his family. The commentators ask: "To his holding" is understandable, but "to his family"? Did he ever abandon his family? The answer is that when you have no money, nobody knows you. Suddenly you become an estate owner - look what a huge family you have! Everyone knows you, everyone comes to visit, and suddenly so-and-so discovers he is a third cousin through a grandmother's sister, who lived in the same Moroccan village long ago. "I didn't know we were related!" - if you can call that being related. Closeness often stems from money; money brings people together. But the poor, unfortunate person - "is separated from his friend."
And what about "and the borrower is a servant to the lender"? You might ask: Does the rich man rule only over the poor? Rabbeinu Yonah comes and explains: No, the rich man also holds sway over people who are neither destitute nor poor. How so? If you examine bank records, you will see that most loans are actually taken by the wealthy, the people of means. This is not only because banks do not lend to those without collateral - which is also a factor - but primarily because someone without means generally lives within his budget, whereas the rich man sets out to erect a building, to develop a complex. Where will he get three hundred million? The opportunities exist, but the liquid cash is not there. What does he do? He takes out a loan, leverages his seed capital, and gets to work.
It follows, then, that "and the borrower is a servant to the lender" does not refer exclusively to the pauper. The borrower can be an ordinary person, an average individual, or even another wealthy person. This is the novel insight of the verse: the rich rules over the poor because one is rich and the other is poor; and if someone says, "I am not poor, you have no mastery over me" - I rule over you as well, for you too anticipate needing a loan, wanting to launch a business, or hoping to purchase an apartment at a bargain price. Consequently, the rich man rules even over those who are not destitute, because they too become borrowers. And what is the primary message of the verse? Rabbeinu Yonah says: the heart of the message lies in the subsequent verse, as we will soon see.
The Vilna Gaon explains that the poor are under the dominion of the rich, and the borrower is a servant to the lender, and states: so it is in Torah. That is, he follows the approach of Rashi, which is the Gaon's consistent method throughout the Book of Mishlei. The Gemara relates that Rabbi Eliezer ben Yaakov was one who "borrowed and repaid" (yazif u-fara). He had a set study schedule, and whenever he was unable to complete his daily study quota - due to matters of livelihood or because he was invited to an event - he would borrow and repay. In other words: during the day I must study Torah; if I could not study by day, I take a loan and repay it at night. Returning home, if he usually slept at ten, he would sleep at eleven, dedicating the hour missed during the day to nighttime study.
It is told of Rav Ovadia Yosef ztz"l that whenever Purim arrived, he would hold a nocturnal vigil and study the entire night. Why? Because on Purim day he could not study: visitors arrived constantly, mishloach manot, family, grandchildren - how could one learn like that? Therefore, he would study through the entire night. For if a person dozes off with a mishloach manot package in hand, it is no catastrophe; but to fall asleep while studying - what becomes of the Torah study? In this way, he learned at night on account of the day, following the pattern of Rabbi Eliezer ben Yaakov, who borrowed by day and repaid at night.
And one who does not repay at night either - working during the day and failing to settle the debt at night - remains a borrower his entire life. Throughout his life he takes loans and never repays them. In contrast, his neighbor, a talmid chacham who pursues his Torah day and night, repays by day and by night. Thus the first neighbor is the borrower, having never learned at all, while his righteous neighbor is the lender - "and the borrower is a servant to the lender." You have borrowed all your life, and he has lent to you all your life; for by what merit do you exist? By virtue of what that scholar lends, whose Torah protects you as well. Consequently, in the World to Come you will be in the position of a servant to the one who engaged in Torah, humbled before him, for he was constantly lending to you while you took loans you never repaid.
The Vilna Gaon offers another explanation, this time based on the doctrine of gilgul (reincarnation). The Gemara in Masechet Bechorot 8b records the dialogue between Rabbi Yehoshua ben Chananya and the Elders of Athens - a fascinating account largely explained through allegory and hint (remez), where they ask and he answers, he asks and they answer, wondrous matters whose true depth lies far beyond their literal sense. They asked him: "If a man lent money and had to seize property from buyers (torif), what did he see to lend again?" In plain terms: a person lent money to his friend, presumably for a profitable venture, but the borrower defaulted, forcing the lender to seize land from third-party buyers (tirpa min halekochot). What does torif mean? When you fail to pay your debt and then sell a field to someone else, I approach that buyer and demand: "Give me the field." "What does that have to do with you? He sold it to me!" "The field is mortgaged to my debt. I lent him money two years ago, and you bought the field one year ago; you purchased an encumbered property." If so, if someone lent money, did not recover his funds smoothly, and had to extract them forcefully by seizing property from buyers, what reason does he have to turn around and lend again? It defies logic.
Rabbi Yehoshua ben Chananya answered them with a parable: "A man went to a marsh, cut a first bundle of wood, and could not lift it. He went and cut more and placed it on top, saying, 'Perhaps someone will come along and help me lift it.'" A person went out to gather wood, cut a first bundle, and saw it was too heavy to carry back to town. What did he do? He cut even more wood and piled it on top. If you could not lift the first bundle, why add more? He reasoned: Since I cannot lift it alone anyway, someone else will eventually come along, and we will carry it together. His message was clear: It is true that I tried once and failed, but I will try again and again until I succeed. Ask successful businesspeople; many will recount how many failed ventures preceded their success. Did they despair? "I opened a business and it collapsed; I started over elsewhere and was undermined; the third time I relocated here; the fourth time I launched - and Baruch Hashem, it flourished." The lesson is never to despair. If a person tried once and the venture failed, he is granted another opportunity; there is always another chance.
Yet, as noted, these exchanges are allegorical. The Vilna Gaon explains: What were they truly asking? They were asking about gilgul. When a soul is reincarnated for a second lifetime, what is the purpose? During the first lifetime the person stumbled and failed; what point is there in sending him down a second time? "A man who lent" refers to one who enters this world, takes a loan, and must repay it; repayment consists of performing mitzvot, fulfilling the will of Hashem, and learning Torah. Our entire lifespan is essentially a loan. "And had to seize" (vetorif) means that ultimately the person failed to meet his obligation, and he was snatched away to his eternal home without settling the debt. "What did He see to lend again?" - what purpose does the Holy One, Blessed be He, see in sending the soul down here once more? The second body cannot benefit the first body that failed to achieve its rectification! To this, Rabbi Yehoshua answered: "Perhaps someone will come along and help him lift it." The first body is in the status of a borrower, but a second body will come along that will act as a lender and complete the rectification. Through repeated attempts: the first enterprise failed, the second failed, but the third or fourth will succeed - even up to a thousand times, says the Vilna Gaon. Once the first body began to rectify even a small part, the soul may return in gilgul up to a thousand times. Whoever wishes may examine the literature on gilgulim, as there appears to be a contradiction on this point, even within the Zohar itself, which has been analyzed at length elsewhere.
From this, you can understand the deeper meaning: the first body is in the category of a borrower - it incurred loan after loan, committed transgression after transgression, and repaid nothing, neither repenting nor performing mitzvot. "The borrower is a servant to the lender" - to whom is he a servant? To the lender. And why is he called a servant? To grasp this, one must understand the Vilna Gaon's position on a major question: Which body will rise at the Resurrection of the Dead (Techiyat HaMeitim)? This is a broad topic addressed by many authorities. At first glance, all the earlier bodies failed to complete their rectification, and only the final body achieved it; straightforward logic would suggest that only the final body should rise. On the other hand, one could argue that although the earlier bodies did not complete the rectification, they paved the path toward it. After all, a full rectification encompasses all 613 mitzvot, and each body performed some of them, until over the course of multiple lifetimes the soul reached completion - did the final body really accomplish everything on its own? Certainly not.
The Gaon's view is that only the final body - the one that delivers the finishing stroke (makeh bepatish) - will rise, while the others ("Woe for the beauty that rots in the dust") will remain in the earth. The Ari z"l, by contrast, teaches that all the bodies will rise, provided the person is not among those whose dust does not stir for the Resurrection (such as one who lends with interest) and did not leave this world without rectifying anything at all; if a body rectified something, it will rise with the specific sparks it elevated. The Vilna Gaon here writes according to his own opinion, that only the final body rises. This is the inner meaning of "the borrower is a servant to the lender": the first body is like a servant who continually accumulated debts, while the one that ultimately rises is the lender - the subsequent body that settled the account. Therefore, it is worthwhile to bring the soul back in gilgul time and again, for with the passage of time it will find its completion, and ultimately achieve full rectification.
The Malbim explains our verse in the context of the verses that follow: "A rich man rules over the poor, and a borrower is a servant to the lender"; "He who sows injustice will reap iniquity, and the rod of his fury will perish"; "A generous eye will be blessed, for he gave of his bread to the destitute." It is well known from ancient history that the wealthy would lend to the poor at interest, and the prevailing law dictated that when a debtor had no means to repay, the creditor had the legal right to seize him, his wife, and his children as slaves, subjugating him at will like a master over a bondman, with the slave possessing no voice and no right to protest.
This dynamic led the wealthy, who lent at predatory interest, to utterly crush the impoverished (dalim) and reduce them to absolute destitution (rashim). A rash is in a worse state than a dal: a dal is someone whose assets have dwindled, meaning he once had means and became impoverished; a rash, however, is one who "has nothing at all" (II Shmuel 12:3), completely penniless. Once reduced to rashim, they were forced into servitude. Yet this extreme oppression inevitably sparked rebellions within the realm: the debtors would revolt against the rich, against the estate owners, and against their tormentors, killing them and exacting fierce vengeance - just as occurred during the Bolshevik Revolution.
Indeed, anyone familiar with history knows that this was a primary catalyst for the pogroms across Europe. Jews were barred from almost every trade and profession, and one of the few livelihoods permitted to them was moneylending. Jews knew how to manage money and lent to the local populace; but the compounding interest weighed heavily upon the borrowers. Every time a debtor saw the Jew, he was reminded of his crushing debt, and thought: "I have an easy solution to the debt - instead of wiping out the debt, wipe out the creditor." They would bide their time until a pogrom was incited by a priest's inflammatory sermon. At times, the Malbim notes, situations grew so volatile that governing ministers were forced to enact debt-forgiveness decrees - debt "haircuts" are not a modern invention - to restore civil order, since no ruler tolerates unrest; every ruler demands stability. At other times, rulers would pay off the debts of the poor to the wealthy out of state treasuries simply to buy social peace.
During those turbulent periods, the wealthy who refused to lend with usury, choosing instead to give charity and assist the poor, were spared and held in high honor among the people. This is the intent of the verse: "A rich man rules over the poor" - by what mechanism? By virtue of the fact that "a borrower is a servant to the lender," for the leverage of the debt grants him absolute mastery over the borrower.
זוֹרֵעַ עַוְלָה יִקְצׇר אָוֶן וְשֵׁבֶט עֶבְרָתוֹ יִכְלֶה׃ - One who sows iniquity will reap futility, and the rod of his wrath will perish.
But what will be the end result? One who sows injustice, lending with interest and plunging people into terrible poverty - this is wrongdoing, and "one who sows injustice will reap futility." "Aven" (futility or trouble) means that corresponding to what you did, in accordance with your actions, you will suffer loss and ruin. "And the rod of his wrath will perish" - the very rod with which you ruled wrathfully over the poor will be destroyed. You sowed injustice; you will reap ruin, because they will rise up against him and kill him.
Rashi explains: Just as he sows, so shall he reap; according to his deeds, he receives his recompense. "And the rod of his wrath will perish" - the stalk of his grain will waste away and disappear. It is not entirely clear how Rashi interprets the word evrato, how it connects in his approach to the stalks of grain, and one needs to examine the commentaries further; but in any case, this is how Rashi explains it.
The Vilna Gaon explains based on a concept he mentions numerous times: there are two primary negative character traits - lust and anger (the trait of desire and the trait of wrath). "One who sows injustice" - he unjustly takes from others what belongs to them to satisfy his desire. He has a craving to be wealthy, a desire to indulge his wants in all material matters, and therefore he sows injustice and takes what belongs to others. Such a person will reap futility: people will rise up against him and take back what he seized. "And the rod of his wrath" - this corresponds to anger, the trait of fury that contains wrath (evrah) - it too will perish. Do not think that one can act out of lust and anger without ultimately paying the price.
טוֹב עַיִן הוּא יְבֹרָךְ כִּי נָתַן מִלַּחְמוֹ לַדָּל׃ - One who has a generous eye will be blessed, for he gave of his bread to the poor.
And whom will they spare? The Malbim continues: Do you know who will be blessed? One who was generous of eye - someone who was open-handed and magnanimous with people, who did not demand interest from them and was willing to lend without interest. He has a generous eye, and he will be blessed; people will bless him, protect him, and no one will harm him. And the reason: "For he gave of his bread to the poor" - he genuinely helped and gave to the poor and needy.
Rabbeinu Yonah explains: Since the verse mentioned "One who sows injustice will reap futility," it states in contrast to injustice, "One who has a generous eye will be blessed" - this refers to a generous-hearted person, and he will succeed, "for he gave of his bread to the poor." And what is a "generous eye" (tov ayin)? A person who desires his fellow's well-being and is willing to forgo his own resources - this is called having a generous eye. And as Chazal taught, even a poor person who sustains himself from charity must give charity from what he receives. One might think: How much do I even have? True, but from whatever you do have, you too must give something to charity; do not assume you are exempt.
The Vilna Gaon first cites an explanation by way of derash. Chazal say: "Tov ayin" - this refers to Yaakov. How so? Yaakov lived 130 years before coming to Egypt, and in Egypt he lived for 17 years, for a total of 147 years. If you take the word ayin (עין) in gematria: ayin is 70, nun is 50 - that makes 120, plus yod which is 10 - totaling 130. Yaakov spent "ayin" (130) years in Eretz Yisrael. And how many did he spend in Egypt? 17. And what is the gematria of tov (טוב)? 17. Thus, Yaakov is "tov ayin": "tov" in Egypt and "ayin" in Eretz Yisrael, corresponding to the gematria of the years he spent in each. This is the aspect of "tov ayin is Yaakov" - and concerning him it says, "he shall be blessed"; Yaakov Avinu, whose eye was generous and good, shall be blessed.
The Gaon further cites another explanation, an extraordinarily profound one, which is somewhat lengthy - it is well worth paying close attention, as the development is remarkable. Chazal say: "Tov ayin" refers to the host (ba'al habayit); "he shall be blessed (yevorach)" - do not read yevorach, but rather yevarech (he shall bless), meaning the host recites Birkat Hamazon (there is an opinion that the guest blesses, but here we follow the view that the host, being the generous eye, recites the blessing). Who blesses? The one who fed people at his table, who possesses the quality of a generous eye - he shall lead the blessing, as the word is written without a vav. Thus far is the teaching of Chazal.
The Vilna Gaon asks: I do not understand. How will you explain the continuation of the verse, "for he gives of his bread to the poor"? What is the connection? Does a homeowner necessarily give his bread only to the poor? What does this have to do with the matter?
And the Gra cites the Gemara in Masechet Berachot, folio 20b. Rav Avira expounded: The ministering angels said before the Holy One, blessed be He: Master of the Universe, You make Your Torah appear inconsistent - for in the Torah it is written, "Who shows no favor and takes no bribe," yet on the other hand it is written, "May Hashem lift up His countenance toward you." Does He show favor or does He not show favor? The Holy One, blessed be He, replied to them: Shall I not show favor to Israel? For I wrote for them in the Torah, "And you shall eat and be satisfied, and you shall bless," yet they are meticulous with themselves down to a kezayit and down to a kebeitzah. In the Torah, I said that one recites Birkat Hamazon when sated, yet the Jewish people recite it even over a kezayit and even over a kebeitzah. In simple terms: they show favor, as it were, going beyond the strict requirement - therefore, I too show favor to them. This is the straightforward meaning of the Gemara's answer.
But the Gra asks three questions. First, what is the meaning of "they are meticulous with themselves down to a kezayit and down to a kebeitzah"? If I am already obligated to recite Birkat Hamazon on a kezayit, would I not recite it on a kebeitzah? That is a kal vachomer - an egg is the volume of two olives (according to Rashi; and we will soon see the Rambam). Ostensibly, this makes no sense at all. Second, one might have suggested that this refers to the dispute in the Gemara on folio 45 - over how much one must eat to recite Birkat Hamazon, a kezayit or a kebeitzah - and that they are meticulous in accordance with the Sage who requires a kezayit, or the Sage who requires a kebeitzah. But this explanation is also incomprehensible: "Is there any doubt before Heaven?" One Sage holds a kezayit and the other holds a kebeitzah, but the Holy One, blessed be He, certainly knows the exact measure, so how could Hashem say "down to a kezayit and down to a kebeitzah"? "His lips utter knowledge clearly" - with the Holy One, blessed be He, everything is clear and there are no uncertainties before Him.
And third, Hashem says: I show favor to them because they are meticulous. Are there no other stringencies we observe meticulously? After all, the daughters of Israel took upon themselves the stringency that even for a drop of blood the size of a mustard seed, they sit seven clean days - here is a stringency, here is meticulous care; how could I not show them favor for that? And do not dismiss this by claiming it is not a good example because Birkat Hamazon applies equally to men and women, whereas this applies only to women - for that is no answer, since sitting for a drop of blood like a mustard seed means separating from her husband, which means the stringency belongs to the husband as well. In short: there are many other matters in which we are meticulous, so why focus specifically on the kezayit and the kebeitzah?
Therefore, says the Gra, the explanation seems to follow the interpretation of the Rif: the measure of two meals is eighteen dried figs, which equal six eggs. If so, one meal is nine dried figs, which equal three eggs. And in the Zohar it is written that in three eggs there are ten olives - meaning ten kezayits in three eggs. This aligns very well with the Rambam: if we calculate an egg as fifty-six grams, then fifty-six times three is one hundred sixty-eight, and if there are ten olives in three eggs, divide by ten and we get 16.8 grams. That is the Rambam's kezayit. That is to say, according to his approach, a kezayit is not close to thirty grams, but around seventeen grams - between fifteen and seventeen - according to the calculation that the measure of a meal is three eggs.
Rashi disagrees, holding that the measure of a meal is four eggs. And a mnemonic to remember this: Rashi - his personal name was Shlomo, four letters; Rambam - his personal name was Moshe, three letters. Moshe - three eggs; Shlomo - four eggs. People tend to get confused, since the acronym "Rambam" has four letters and "Rashi" has three, but one does not go by the acronym, rather by the personal first name. Incidentally, this is also the measure of kveiat se'udah (establishing a meal) according to the Rambam: around one hundred seventy grams constitutes the measure of kveiat se'udah.
Let us continue with the calculation. It turns out that the measure of a meal is three eggs, which are ten olives, and this is the measure over which one recites Birkat Hamazon by Torah law: if you ate an amount of one hundred seventy grams - this is a meal, this is satisfaction, "And you shall eat and be satisfied" - the Torah says: bless. And this is why it says, "And you shall eat and be satisfied and you shall bless" in the singular: if I ate the measure of a meal by myself, I recite the blessing.
But the Jewish people are holy, and in the words of the Gra there: "And they searched with candles how to magnify and exalt Him even more" - the Jewish people search with candles for ways to give even greater thanks to the Holy One, blessed be He. What do they do? If one has such a meal measure, three eggs which are ten olives, he searches for ten men. Why? Because when I eat together with nine others, each one of us receives a kezayit - and we have a zimmun, a zimmun with Hashem's Name! How wonderful: I could eat the measure of a meal alone, or I could bring nine more people so that each receives a kezayit from the portion of food I have, and then we merit a zimmun with the Name of Hashem. And if I tried to gather ten and did not find them, but found two others - well and good, we will have a zimmun even if not with the Divine Name. And how much does each one receive? A kebeitzah, for the measure of a meal is three eggs; if we were ten, each received a kezayit, and when we are three, each will eat a kebeitzah.
And this is what the Holy One, blessed be He, is saying: Shall I not show favor to Israel? For I wrote, "And you shall eat and be satisfied, and you shall bless" - eat to satisfaction and bless - yet they are meticulous with themselves to bring more people so they can bless over a kezayit. And our question is resolved as to why a kezayit was mentioned first: because the greater meticulousness is to bring ten and bless with the Divine Name, in which case each receives a kezayit; and if one is not meticulous to that degree, or did not find ten - "down to a kebeitzah," meaning at least three men, and each receives an egg, and we have once again gained having a zimmun.
And the Gra adds: indeed, notice that the measures of a kezayit and a kebeitzah are mentioned in the Gemara precisely in the context of zimmun. The Mishnah in Berachot (Chapter 7, Mishnah 2) states: Up to how much must one eat to join in a zimmun? Down to a kezayit; Rabbi Yehudah says, down to a kebeitzah. Thus, regarding zimmun, the matter of a kezayit and a kebeitzah is explicitly mentioned! If so, there is no difficulty in the contradiction between the verses: what are you asking, that it is written, "Who shows no favor and takes no bribe," so how can He show them favor? The Holy One, blessed be He, says: I show favor to them because they are meticulous - and from their own food they distribute to other people in order to merit a zimmun of ten, or at the very least a zimmun of three. Therefore, I too show them favor.
According to this, our verse is beautifully explained: "One of generous eye shall be blessed" - who is one of generous eye? A person who took other people and included them in his meal, and from his three eggs divided ten olives and gave each a portion, gathering people to the meal - he shall be blessed. And what is "shall be blessed"? "May Hashem lift up His countenance toward you and grant you peace" in the Priestly Blessing. How does one merit "May Hashem lift up His countenance toward you"? When you are generous of eye and bring more people so they can make a zimmun with you and you have a zimmun with Hashem's Name - you will merit the blessing of "May Hashem lift up His countenance toward you." That is "shall be blessed." And why? "For he gives of his bread to the poor" - and this is the marvelous point with which the Gra began by asking: where is "he gives of his bread to the poor" found here, and what is its connection to Birkat Hamazon? The answer: how do you actually reach a quorum of ten? By dividing my meal, which consists of ten olives, among nine other people. Thus, "he gives of his bread to the poor," and through this they show favor to the Torah - and therefore, "May Hashem lift up His countenance toward you."
And also according to the homiletic teaching of Chazal, "Do not read yevorach ('shall be blessed'), but yevarech ('shall bless')" - the matter fits together beautifully. A person of generous eye is one who gave of his meal to others. And why did he give? In order to bless with a zimmun. Therefore, he shall lead Birkat Hamazon, for who initiated the zimmun here? I did, by dividing my meal among ten, and through me you have a zimmun with Hashem's Name - so you lead the zimmun, you recite the blessing. One of generous eye, the one who performed this deed, he shall bless, for he gave of his bread to the poor, and consequently the privilege of reciting the blessing belongs to him. Truly marvelous.
The three verses join together into a single progression: "The rich rules over the poor, and the borrower is a servant to the lender" describes the power of wealth to dominate - not only over the destitute, but over anyone in need of a loan; and the continuation teaches where this leads - "He who sows injustice shall reap sorrow, and the rod of his wrath shall fail," meaning that exploitation and predatory interest ultimately bring down the oppressors themselves, whereas "one who has a generous eye will be blessed, for he gave of his bread to the poor," and whoever was generous and did not press the poor is spared and blessed. The Vilna Gaon added two further perspectives: "the borrower is a servant to the lender" in Torah study - one who does not pay his debt of study remains a borrower all his life, and his neighbor, the Torah scholar, is the lender whose Torah protects him; and by way of reincarnation - the first body is the borrower, and the final one, which puts the finishing touch on the soul's rectification, is the lender that will rise at the resurrection. Finally, "one who has a generous eye" (tov ayin) alludes to Yaakov Avinu according to the numerical value of his years, and it also refers to one who shares his meal with others to merit a zimun and a blessing - and toward him, the Holy One, Blessed is He, shows favor.