We now come to the teaching of Shammai, chapter 1, mishnah 15. Shammai was Hillel's colleague and the head of the court, and the Gemara testifies about him that he was a kapdan - a stern, exacting man. Many people are not naturally drawn to that kind of personality, and some even feel a certain distance from Shammai as a person. That seems to be a mistake, and not only because he was among the very greatest in moral and Torah stature. Shammai was indeed exacting, and he had no patience for nonsense; but the mishnah before us shows that what he preaches is something far more serious - and beautiful - and reveals a deep, good and caring man. The fact that he was strict and precise does not indicate, Heaven forbid, that he was not warm, kind and caring.
Background: Shammai and his academy:
Shammai rose to the leadership of the Jewish people during Hillel's time, or shortly before, replacing a man named Menachem. We do not know much about Menachem, the previous head of the court, other than that he left his position to serve the king - Herod, or his father Antipater, who technically was not a king but a governor. Once Menachem left, Shammai took his place.
Shammai had a yeshivah, and he was a man of the elite, as emerges clearly from Avos d'Rabbi Nasan. He accepted into his yeshivah only the finest of the finest: select students, brilliant and disciplined, and wealthy enough that they could afford to learn all day long without worrying about a livelihood. The Gemara states that the students of Beis Shammai were "mechadedei tefei" - sharper and more brilliant, an undeniable elite. And nevertheless, the halachah was decided according to the tradition of Beis Hillel, the competing yeshivah.
Shammai was apparently already running his academy in Jerusalem when Hillel arrived in the city and established his own. Hillel was far more of a man of the people and admitted everyone, and for that reason his students far outnumbered Shammai's. For the same reason the halachah is generally decided like Beis Hillel: they were the majority, and the rule is "acharei rabim l'hatos" - the majority decides when the Sanhedrin convenes.
In the days of Hillel and Shammai, however, it was difficult for the Sanhedrin to convene at all. When Herod came to power in 37 BCE, his first act was to execute forty six members of the Sanhedrin. He stripped the sages entirely of their authority and made the very act of functioning as a Sanhedrin dangerous. For this reason there were few occasions on which they could gather, deliberate, vote and decide. Hillel and Shammai themselves disagreed in only three cases, but their students, who in the Gemara's words did not serve their teachers sufficiently and did not receive firsthand the practical knowledge of how their masters ruled, multiplied disputes and differences of opinion, until the Torah almost became like two Torahs.
The halachah therefore follows Beis Hillel because they were the majority, but not always. The famous Gemara in Shabbos tells of the students of Hillel and Shammai who gathered in an upper chamber, and there Beis Shammai were the majority - and on that day they decreed eighteen decrees, and in those cases the halachah follows Beis Shammai. Moreover, at times Hillel himself had to sit at Shammai's feet, out of respect for Shammai, who was the greater scholar.
We know of only a few of Shammai's students, four in fact:
Rabbi Tzadok ben Yochanan.
Bava ben Buta.
Dostai of Kfar Yavneh.
Yo'ezer of the Birah.
As great as they were, and although they were known for their extraordinary piety, they do not play a particularly significant role in the chain of transmission.
The three things Shammai said:
"Aseh Torascha keva" - make your Torah study fixed.
"Emor me'at va'aseh harbeh" - say little and do much.
"Vehevei mekabel es kol ha'adam b'sever panim yafos" - receive every person with a happy, smiling countenance.
"Aseh Torascha keva":
According to the Vilna Gaon, some had a longer version of the text here: not only that Torah should be fixed, but also "u'melachtecha arai" - your work should be the incidental thing, the opposite of what is fixed. In explaining this, we find two approaches:
The maximalist approach (the Bartenura): A person must devote his time, in quantity and in quality, to Torah study, and push earning a living and everything like it off to the side. When he grows tired of learning, he works; but his entire life revolves around learning as much as is possible.
The halachic approach (Machzor Vitry): Torah as a fixed matter means that a person sets aside certain sanctified times in his day, every single day, for Torah study.
Some soften the first approach somewhat: even a person whose waking hours are mostly given over to work can still fulfill the idea of Torah as the fixed thing in his life - not in terms of quantity but in terms of quality. Torah is the center of his life and its focal point, the centripetal force that constantly pulls him back to it. Even if he is forced to work most hours of the day, his heart and mind are focused on Torah study, drawn to it, invested in it and longing for it.
The famous Gemara in Shabbos 31a lists the questions a person is asked when he comes to the World of Truth, and one of them is: "Kavata itim laTorah?" - did you establish fixed times for learning? This is the idea: learning is a fixed part of the routine, and because of its importance it cannot be encroached upon. It does not get pushed aside, it is at the top of the priority list, and therefore the entire schedule is built around it. As Rabbi Stefansky said about his Daf Yomi shiur: it is not about "the daf," it is about "the yomi" - not so much the content of the page, but the consistent dedication of time, day after day, to learning and growing in Torah.
This concept of consistency at a set and defined time is not the maximalist position, and therefore it is something that every single person can and must do. And so it is indeed ruled as practical halachah in the Mishnah Berurah (siman 155, se'if 4): "A person must designate a fixed time every day" - to set aside a fixed, defined time each day for Torah study, "that he should never remove" - it is never missed, and everything is arranged around it. "If something beyond his control occurred and he could not complete his fixed learning during the day" - if for some reason he was unable to fulfill his fixed obligation that day, "he should treat it like a debt" - he should view it as a debt he must repay, since he took a fixed obligation upon himself, and therefore "he should make it up at night."
This is not, then, learning when it is convenient, when a free moment happens to come along, but precisely the opposite. The first approach held that learning is always the focus and everything else is secondary; the second approach says that even for someone who has other matters in his life, learning is a central part of them, and he dedicates a set time in his day to it. And practically speaking, since the verse says "and you shall meditate in it day and night," technically a person should set a time in his schedule both in the morning and at night, in order to fulfill this concept of consistency. And again, quantity is not what determines it: the fixed learning can be one halachah in the Kitzur Shulchan Aruch after Maariv, hearing the daily halachah from the rabbi, or learning a mishnah in Pirkei Avos. The main thing is that it is fixed - fixed in one's mental orientation, and therefore fixed in one's schedule and in the life that revolves around it as its center.
"Emor me'at va'aseh harbeh":
The example of this idea is of course Avraham Avinu in the famous story of his receiving the three guests, the angels. He says "ekchah pas lechem" - just a small slice of bread - and it immediately becomes clear that he needs enormous loaves; and in the end he brings no bread at all, but rather tongue with mustard and the like. He said little and did much.
The motivation for this, in the language of social psychology, is that anyone standing in the public eye is focused on two things: presenting himself, and convincing those around him that he is good and that he is competent. Every time people glance over - or he imagines that they are glancing over - and see that he is not as good or as capable as he wanted them to think, he feels ashamed and embarrassed. This is why a person invests so much in maintaining a social front. Shammai is saying here that one must stop focusing on looking good and focus simply on being good. "Emor me'at va'aseh harbeh" means: stop talking about what you are going to do and how you are going to do it, stop announcing to people what you are doing - and just get the job done. Harry Truman famously said: "It is amazing what you can accomplish if you do not care who gets the credit." That is the idea: stop talking and convincing others that you are doing the right thing, and just keep helping people and doing the right thing.
"Vehevei mekabel es kol ha'adam b'sever panim yafos":
The Bartenura explains this relatively narrowly, applying it especially to the moment a person receives a guest into his home. Whether it is a guest who needs food and a bed or someone asking for money - whatever it is that one gives him, if the giving is done with a sad, angry or sour face, the entire gift is nullified by the negative feelings broadcast by the scowling face. Therefore one should give to everyone with a smiling face, and then the recipient of the hospitality, the favor or the charity feels comfortable with it, and it is done properly and to everyone's benefit.
The Tiferes Yisrael explains it more broadly: this is not specifically about guests in the home, but about every person. Even in a chance meeting in the street one should greet the other person pleasantly and be pleasant in dealing with everyone. It makes no difference whether the person is rich or poor - that is, which side is the giver and which is the receiver - and even if he is needy and a burden on our resources: one should put on a smile and receive him the way we would want to be received. And likewise it makes no difference whether he is Jewish or not Jewish; every human being is a human being, and every person should be received with a smiling face. It benefits the recipient, it benefits the giver, and it costs nothing.
The Portrait of Shammai That Emerges from the Mishnah:
When we look at all three statements together, as one broad picture, it becomes clear what sort of person Shammai is calling for. Yes, he is exacting, but here is his call: the center of my life is Torah study, and therefore I have no time to waste; I do not spend my time on talk, but call for action - a great deal of action for the world, for people, for those who need us, and with complete readiness. There is no time to talk, but there is all the time in the world to act and to help others. And not only that, but to do it with a smiling, happy face - not merely the act itself, but an act done in a way that is pleasant for the recipient as well. This is not merely the portrait of a good man, but of a beloved man: a very serious person, a person with seriousness of purpose, but not a harsh, scowling old man, Heaven forbid.
The Three Statements as a Response to the Verse in Yirmiyahu:
The Bartenura explains that the three statements correspond to the verse in Yirmiyahu (chapter 9, verse 22): "So says Hashem: Let not the wise man glory in his wisdom, and let not the mighty man glory in his might, and let not the rich man glory in his riches" - the wise man should not take pride in his wisdom or praise himself for it, nor the mighty man for his might, nor the rich man for his wealth. Shammai's three statements are therefore addressed to these three types, to inform them that even if it seems to them that they have succeeded in their field and in their area of expertise, they should not feel that they have arrived at the goal:
To the wise man: The learned man, full of knowledge, is still here in order to learn, and he must not think that he has finished his work. On the contrary, he must set fixed times and dedicate hours - and according to the Bartenura, even learn day and night - giving his time, and the best of his time, to Torah study. It never comes to an end.
To the rich man: The man of means is liable to get stuck in a situation where he is more concerned with looking good than with doing good. If he has wealth to pass on, he has something to give - and he is obligated to give. Let him stop talking and start doing; he has been blessed with money, so let him not glory in his wealth but use it for a good purpose, spread that wealth around and do good deeds for others.
To the mighty man: As we know from another Mishnah in Pirkei Avos, "Eizehu gibor? Hakovesh es yitzro" - "Who is mighty? He who conquers his inclination" - one who controls himself and his impulses. And it seems that nothing tests a person's good character, frustrates him and pushes his buttons, more than annoying people. People can frustrate, dismiss, pester and waste your time, and it is natural to become irritated, to grow angry and to lose patience. But one who sees himself as mighty should learn to be mighty in self-control: even with the annoying, the pestering, the demanding and the time-wasters among them, he receives every single person with a pleasant countenance and a smile, available to them and patient with them. And then, however annoying they may be, he does not let them affect him; and even if they do affect him, he does not show it - he is in control of himself, mighty, and he keeps the smile on his face.
In summary: In this Mishnah we learned Shammai's three statements - "Aseh Torascha keva" - "Make your Torah study fixed," "Emor me'at va'aseh harbeh" - "Say little and do much," and "Hevei mekabel es kol ha'adam b'sever panim yafos" - "Receive every person with a pleasant countenance." We examined the two approaches to fixing Torah study, the maximalist approach of the Bartenura and the approach of setting fixed times that was ruled in the Mishnah Berurah; the call to prefer action over talk, in the way of Avraham Avinu; and the obligation to receive every person with a shining face, whether in one's home or in the street, whether rich or poor, whether Jew or non-Jew. And finally we saw how the three statements correspond to the wise man, the rich man and the mighty man of the verse in Yirmiyahu - and from them emerges the true portrait of Shammai: a serious and demanding man, but a good man, a caring man, and a lover of people.