De'ot - Chapter 5

This term provides the key to this chapter. Throughout the chapter, the Rambam uses the termתלמיד חכם (Torah Sage). However, he begins the chapter by using the term, חכם (wise man), to refer to his statements in Chapter 1, Halachot 4-5, which describe a wise man as one who constantly evaluates his behavior and follows the desired middle path.

Sefer HaMitzvot (positive mitzvah 8) describes the mitzvah of resembling God as seeking “to emulate Him — His good deeds and the honorable attributes with which He was described.” As mentioned in the commentary to the first chapter, in Hilchot De’ot, the Rambam puts a far greater stress on a person’s emulation of God’s “attributes” and less to the emulation of His deeds. Therefore, the first three chapters emphasize the importance of personality development and the methods with which we can refine our character traits. This chapter concludes the treatment of the mitzvah to emulate God and focuses on the “good deeds” that reflect the process of inner refinement described above.
In Chapter 3, the Rambam postulates that we must set two goals for our behavior: a) an immediate and intermediary goal, the maintenance of physical health; b) the ultimate goal, the knowledge and service of God. In Chapter 4, he outlines a regimen of behavior that allows man to reach the first goal. In this chapter, he concentrates on the second and more complete purpose.

The commentaries have suggested the Sifri, Zot HaBrachah and Derech Eretz Zuta, Chapters 5 and 7, as sources for the Rambam’s statements. However, these sources are not quoted verbatim. Rather, they serve as models which the Rambam uses as the basis for his own composition. The Rambam elaborates on each of the particulars listed here in the following halachot. With regard to eating, see the second part of this halachah and Halachah 2.

This refers to drinking wine. See Halachah 3.

See Halachot 4-5.

See Halachah 6

See Halachah 7.

See Halachah 8.

See Halachah 9.

See Halachot 10-12.

See Halachot 13.

Though the Rambam begins the chapter with the use of the term חכם (wise man), when he starts to speak of details, he employs the term תלמיד חכם (Torah Sage). Perhaps this implies that the peaks of character development epitomized by the חכם can only be achieved when one develops his wisdom in Torah study.

As described in the previous chapter. Furthermore, even when eating these foods, he should not overindulge.

In the previous chapter, Halachah 15, the Rambam warned against overeating from a health perspective. Now, he treats it as an ethical inadequacy and a departure from the desired middle path. See also Chapter 1, Halachah 4, Chapter 3, Halachah 2.

The Rambam underlines the negative aspects of the tendency to overindulge and gorge oneself on food by using an extreme example. See also the Guide for the Perplexed, Vol. III, Chapter 8, where he compares people who pursue gluttony to a slave who revels in dung.

We have translated the verse in keeping with the interpretation of our Sages quoted below. However, in its original context, the verse refers to those who bring the festival offerings without proper intent.

Shabbat 151b.

Though it is a mitzvah to celebrate the Sabbaths and festivals with feasts, here we are referring to those who feast: a) self-indulgently and without a commitment to fulfill God’s will; and b) constantly and not only on select occasions.

This statement is found in Isaiah 22:13. However, the Rambam is not quoting the verse as a support; he is merely borrowing the expression to exemplify an existential search for pleasure.

The final word of the verse, מקום, can also refer to God and thus, implies that God’s presence is also lacking. Eating for the sake of indulgence is the direct opposite of the approach of “Knowing God in all your ways” described previously. Avot 3:3 also quotes this verse and the Rambam alludes to that mishnah in the following halachah.

As a source for eating two dishes, the commentaries have suggested Derech Eretz Rabbah, Chapter 7:
It happened that Rabbi Akiva served a meal to his students. [The servants] brought two dishes before them... they ate and were satisfied.
As a source for eating one dish, they point to (Sanhedrin 94b):
“And may the name of the righteous be blessed (Proverbs 3:33)” — this refers to Hezekiah, king of Judah, who ate [only] a litra of greens for a meal.
These sources notwithstanding, it appears that the Rambam is merely stating that a Sage should confine himself to simple and modest fare; he may not have had a specific source in mind.

Note the Rambam’s use of this verse in Chapter 1, Halachah 4.

The previous halachah discussed the quantity of food and the attitude with which it was to be eaten. The present halachah concerns itself with the place and the company in which the wise should eat. It revolves around the principle that a person should be modest while eating and refrain from doing so in public. (See the Guide for the Perplexed, loc. cit.)

Kol Ya’akov notes that this store may even be one specifically designated for eating, e.g., a restaurant, coffee-shop, or the like. Indeed, we find the Hebrew, חנות, used to refer to a place of eating in Bava Metzia 83b.

Though the Jerusalem Talmud, Ma’aserot 3:2 mentions this prohibition in reference to a Torah Sage, the Babylonian Talmud, Kiddushin 40b condemns even a common person for such behavior, stating: “Whoever eats in the marketplace is like a dog.” The passage in Kiddushin continues to explain that such a person is unacceptable as a witness and the Rambam quotes that law (Hilchot Edut 11:5).

Sanhedrin 52b states that, at the outset, a common person will consider a Torah Sage to be like a vessel of gold. However, if the Sage derives benefit from the common person, he will come to regard the Sage like an earthenware shard. Note Hilchot Yesodei HaTorah 5:11, where the Rambam equates the dining of a learned and pious man together with the unlearned with the desecration of the name of God. See also Hilchot Sanhedrin 25:4, where he rules that communal leaders and judges should not eat and drink with the common people.

This expression is obviously a reference to Avot 3:3:
[When] three eat at one table and do not speak words of Torah there, it is as if they eat from sacrifices to the dead, [i.e., idols,] as [Isaiah 28:8] states: “For all tables are full of vomit and excrement; there is no room.”
In his commentary to this mishnah, the Rambam writes:
Previously, the verse dealt with eating and drinking while forsaking the Torah and those who study it. Therefore, all of these tables are considered as if excrement and filth; i.e., the foods of idol worship, are eaten upon them.

Outside his own home; i.e., the wise man, even when he eats in a private home and in the proper company, should limit the number of homes that he frequents (Pesachim 49a).

The reason for these restrictions is, as the Rambam expresses in the Guide for the Perplexed (loc. cit.), to habituate a person, particularly when he relates to others, to emphasize the refined and developed aspects of his being and not those which he shares with other animals. Therefore, even when there is no danger of subjecting himself to undesirable influences or disgracing the Torah with which he is identified, he should refrain from performing a physical activity like eating in the presence of others.

Chullin 95b states that Rav would not partake of a meal in public unless it was associated with a mitzvah.

This decision is not accepted by all authorities. Some do not consider such a betrothal feast as “associated with a mitzvah.” ארוסין translated as “betrothal,” refers to the first stage of the marriage process, i.e., giving the woman the wedding ring. In Talmudic and post-Talmudic times, this ceremony was carried out before the actual wedding. At present, we perform the two stages of the wedding, ארוסין and נשואין together. Thus, reference to what we term engagement as ארוסין is technically a misnomer.

Pesachim 49a mentions that weddings between scholars and common people are undesirable and should not be attended by a Torah Sage (Avodat HaMelech). The Rambam also deals with this subject in Hilchot Issurei Bi’ah, Chapter 21.

. Chullin 7b relates that even when Rabbi Yehudah HaNasi invited Rabbi Pinchas ben Yair to a meal, the latter Sage refused. Note also the Rambam’s comments at the conclusion of Hilchot Zechiyah UMatanah.

Ketubot 8b states that wine is useful in the process of digestion.

The commentaries cite Berachot 29b: “Do not become drunk and do not sin;” a passage which seems to say that drink leads to sin. It seems, however, that the Rambam is intimating that drinking itself is sinful.

In the Guide for the Perplexed, Vol. III, Chapter 8, the Rambam castigates drunken revelry in the harshest terms:
A drinking party is more shameful than a gathering of naked people [who] defecate together in daylight in one place. Elimination is a necessary human function. However, drunkenness is the voluntary act of the wicked man.

See Proverbs 31:5: “Lest he drink and forget the Law and pervert the judgment of all the poor.” The Torah gives examples of the degrading effects of drunkenness (Noah, Genesis, Chapter 8; Lot, Genesis, Chapter 19). There are specific prohibitions against drinking — e.g. a priest is not allowed to perform the priestly services while under the influence of alcohol (Leviticus 10:9-11). Similarly, numerous passages throughout the Prophets and Sacred Writings castigate drunkenness. These are also paralleled in the Rabbinic literature, e.g. Sanhedrin 70a, Vayikra Rabbah 12.

Note the Rambam’s remarks in Hilchot Sanhedrin 25:4:
When a person is given a position of authority over the community... most certainly [he is forbidden] to eat and drink and become drunk in public and in a gathering of the ignorant or at a repast of friends. Woe to those judges who act with such affront to the Torah of Moses, who disgrace its laws and reduce it to the earth, bring it down to the dust and cause evil to themselves and their descendants in this world and the next.
Most commentaries cite Pesachim 49a as the source for the Rambam’s statement. That passage, however, does not mention intoxication. The Zohar, Vol. I, 110a, specifically associates drunkenness with the desecration of God’s name.

Note Hilchot Tefilah 4:17 which considers a revi’it (between 3 and 5 oz.) of wine as slightly intoxicating. Since our wines are considerably weaker than those of the Rambam’s time, it is questionable whether this measure would apply today.

Avot 3:13 mentions wine that is drunken in the afternoon as one of four things which “remove a person from the world.” Avot D’Rabbi Natan, ch. 21, explains that drinking wine in the afternoon causes a person to “negate the entire Torah.”

To the same degree as wine that is drunk without food. See the Rambam’s Commentary to the Mishnah, Pesachim 10:6.

I.e., outside the restrictions of the Nidah laws, there are no limits to the frequency with which a couple may enjoy intimacy.

Though a Jew’s commitment to holiness must encompass every aspect of his behavior, the Torah and our Sages have always emphasized the importance of this quality with regard to marital intimacy. There is no more powerful expression of man’s basic, instinctive nature than sex. Therefore, precisely in this area, must a Jew reveal that his nature is not only material, but that he possesses a spiritual dimension that lies at the core of his being and seeks expression. For this reason, the Jewish marriage bond is referred to as Kiddushin, emphasizing how kedushah, holiness, is a fundamental element in marriage. Similarly, Leviticus 20:7, proclaims “Sanctify yourselves and be holy, for I am God, your Lord,” as a preface to the laws proscribing forbidden sexual relations. Sh’vuot 18b interprets the above verse as also including a command to conduct oneself in a holy manner within permitted relationships.
The quality of holiness involves not only restraint, as mentioned in the ensuing statements, but also the manner in which relations are carried out. The Rambam elaborates on this aspect in Hilchot Issurei Bi’ah 21:9 and in his Commentary to the Mishnah, Sanhedrin 7:4.

The rooster is a widely used symbol of lust. The phrase used by the Rambam is quoted from Berachot 22a. See also Hilchot Tefilah 4:5. In Hilchot Issurei Bi’ah 21:11, the Rambam also elaborates on this matter, calling frequent sexual relations a severe blemish and boorish behavior which was frowned upon by the Sages.

Ketubot 62a, b describes the frequency with which people involved in different occupations should engage in marital intimacy (See also Hilchot Ishut 14:1-4.). The measure given here is the one allotted to Torah Sages.

Ketubot (loc. cit.) states that Psalms 1:3: “It brings forth its fruit in its season” applies to such a person. The commentaries note the continuation of the verse, “Its leaves will not wither”, and interpret it as implying that the draining of physical energy caused by marital intimacy which the Rambam described in Chapter 4, Halachah 21, will not occur when a person follows this schedule.
Iggeret HaKodesh (attributed to the Ramban) emphasizes that on the Sabbath, a person is granted a greater spiritual potential which enables him to maintain his bond with God even when involved in physical activities.

See Hilchot Ishut, Chapter 14, where the Rambam prescribes criteria for the frequency of marital intimacy that are coordinated with a person’s physical stamina.

The Rambam quotes this euphemism for marital intimacy from Nedarim 20b

Note Chapter 4, Halachah 19. Iggeret HaKodesh explains that both during the time food is being digested and when a person is hungry, his emotional balance is somewhat disturbed and it is difficult for him to develop the proper attitude and spiritual awareness necessary to make marital intimacy a Godly act. Nedarim 20b emphasizes that the midnight hour also allows a person to rest from all his worldly involvement. The quiet of the hour prevents him from being disturbed by other thoughts and he is able to concentrate on his wife alone.
Despite the advantages of having relations at midnight, many contemporary authorities suggest that a couple not hold to this as a binding rule. If a couple have already begun thinking of intimacy, they should not be forced to wait until midnight to fulfill their desires.

Previously (Chapter 2, Halachah 7), the Rambam cited a mishnah (Avot 3:16) which links lightheadedness and immorality.

Though a man should talk to his wife to prepare her for marital intimacy, he must be careful of what he says. Note the comments of VaYikra Rabbah 24:7: “‘And your camp shall be holy, that He see no lewd things in you’ (Deuteronomy 23:15). The latter refers to unseemly speech. Rav Shmuel bar Nachman said: ‘Lewd speech is obscenity.’”

Chagigah 5b.

When being judged in the afterworld.

For every aspect of a man’s behavior is significant.

For marital intimacy to be a meaningful act, each of the partners must have all their faculties at their command. As mentioned in the following halachah, a proper attitude toward marital intimacy will cause one to father children who are refined and attractive. The converse is also true. If parents engage in marital intimacy in a coarse manner or if there is friction and lack of harmony between them, the children born of their union will have undesirable character traits.
In particular, Nedarim 20b describes ten situations in which relations are forbidden and states that the children born of such unions are endowed with extremely negative tendencies. One of the undesirable states at the time of relations is drunkenness. See also the following halachah and Hilchot Issurei Bi’ah 21:12.

People should not engage in relations except when motivated by desire (preferably a holy desire as explained in ch. 3). For this reason, as mentioned below, a husband should spend time arousing his wife’s desires.

Some manuscripts have עצבים — “depressed” — instead. Neither state of mind conforms to the attitude desired by the Torah as mentioned below.

The act of physical intimacy should be a true union between man and wife. Therefore, the partners must work on developing a single state of mind.

These two situations are also included among the ten prohibited relations mentioned in Nedarim 20b.

The Avodat HaMelech states that this statement also implies that one should not compel his wife to agree to sexual relations. See Eruvin 100b.

Chagigah 5b describes how the Sage, Rav, would abandon all formalities and inspire an atmosphere of relaxed happiness before marital intimacy. (Note the description of Rav in Chapter 2, Halachah 4.)

Iggeret HaKodesh (attributed to the Ramban) states: You should motivate her with words that move her heart and settle her mind and make her happy so that your mind will be fused with hers, and your intent with her intent. You should say some things that arouse her desire, feelings of connection, love, will, and romance, and others which lead her to the fear of God, piety, and modesty.

The commentaries note that the Rambam’s statements are based on the following passage from Nedarim 20b: They asked Ima Shalom (the wife of Rabbi Eliezer): “Why are your children so attractive?”
She replied to them: “He only engages in intimacy with me... at midnight. During marital intimacy, he uncovers a handbreadth and covers a handbreadth (i.e., engages in intercourse modestly) and it appears that a demon is pressuring him” (i.e., he would withdraw after completing the sexual act).

Iggeret HaKodesh states: When a person joins together with his wife while his thoughts cleave to the spiritual realms, those thoughts draw down a sublime light which rests on that drop of semen... Thus, that drop of semen is always connected to that shining light. This is the mystic secret implied in [God’s words to the prophet, Jeremiah, (1:5)]: “Before I formed you in the womb, I knew you;” i.e., He had already established a connection of shining light with the sperm [from which] that righteous man [was conceived] at the time of [his parents’] union.

The latter phrase is borrowed, out of context, from Isaiah 9:1.

The effect of improper sexual behavior on offspring is mentioned in Nedarim 20b and Eruvin 100b. Note our comments in the previous halachah. See, too, Hilchot Issurei Bi’ah 21:12.

With this statement, the Rambam establishes a connection with the previous halachah and sets the motif for what follows. Modesty is not simply a matter of dress, (this is discussed in Halachah 9), but rather, an awareness of God which causes a person to cover head and body out of respect for the Divine Presence. The Rambam expands upon this concept in the Guide for the Perplexed (Vol. III, Chapter 52):
He is constantly with us, observing us, as [Jeremiah 23:24] proclaims: “’Can a man hide himself in the secret places and I not see him,’ says God.” Understand this well.
Know that when perfect men comprehend this, they achieve such humility, such awe and fear of God and a sense of shame before Him... that their private behavior with their wives and in latrines is like their public conduct with other people.
Know that they have forbidden a man to walk with an erect carriage, because: “the entire world is filled with His glory” (Isaiah 6:3)... We are always in His presence... Thus, the greatest among the Sages found it difficult to bare their heads because the Divine Presence constantly hovers over man

Kiddushin 30a relates that Rabbi Chiya bar Abba once saw Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi taking his son to school while wearing a makeshift hat. When Rabbi Chiya asked him the reason he was wearing such a head-covering, he explained that he was forced to leave his home in a hurry and was not able to arrange his turban. Nevertheless, he found it preferable to wear even a makeshift head-covering, rather than go out bareheaded.
Kiddushin 31a quotes Rav Huna, the son of Rav Yeshoshua, as explaining that he would not walk four cubits bareheaded out of respect for “the Divine Presence which is above my head.” (See also Zohar, Vol. III, p. 245b.) Similarly, Shabbat 156b relates that an astrologer told Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak’s mother that he was destined to be a thief. From his earliest childhood, she trained him to avoid this fate. She would constantly tell him to cover his head “so that the fear of God will be upon you.”

The Mishnah Berurah 2:1 lays down the following general rule: Any portion of our bodies which is usually covered should not be revealed unless there is a specific reason for doing so. Modesty, as understood in the present context, results from the awareness of the Divine Presence. The ordinary man experiences such awareness while at prayer when “he is as if standing before the Divine Presence” (Hilchot Tefilah 4:16) and then he is required not to bare his head (ibid. 5:5) or various parts of his body; e.g., his chest (ibid. 4:7) and his feet (ibid. 5:5).
As emphasized in Chapter 3, Halachah 3, a wise man should try to be conscious of the Divine Presence at all times and places. As a result, he will constantly be modest. Though in Talmudic times and in the Rambam’s era, personal modesty and covering one’s head were considered the signs of a sage (Kiddushin 8a) and a unique and special merit (Shabbat 118b), at present, both practices have been accepted as ordinary behavior for all observant Jews.

Tamid 27b quotes Rav as giving his son the following advice: “Sit and then reveal yourself. Cover yourself and stand.”

Since the right hand is used to tie tefillin (Berachot 62a) and is given priority over the left hand regarding service in the Temple (Zevachim 24a), the installation ceremony of priests (Leviticus 8:23), and other ritual manners, it is not proper that it be used for this function. Many authorities maintain that this restriction only applies when one is cleaning oneself with one’s hand alone, but not when one uses toilet paper.

Berachot 62b derives this law from I Samuel 24:3’s description of the behavior of King Saul. Though it is forbidden to delay relieving oneself (Hilchot Ma’achalot Asurot 17:31), our Sages did not give this prohibition precedence over the dictates of modesty (Shulchan Aruch HaRav 3:11).

These restrictions only apply to defecation. The Sages feared that refraining from urination might be damaging (Bechorot 44b).

I.e., even though an observer might see that he is squatting and thus, conclude that he is defecating, since the fence covers his lower body, there is no difficulty (Berachot 62a).

I.e., though the ultimate reason for modesty is the awareness of God’s presence, there also is a dimension of modesty which implies respect for one’s fellow man and restraint in revealing one’s body and bodily functions in his presence.

Berachot 62a states that “modesty and silence are appropriate for the latrine.” Sanhedrin 19a states that women are allowed to speak in the latrine to prevent men from entering.

Berachot, loc. cit. Since modesty is practiced out of an awareness of God’s presence, there is no difference between day and night (The Guide for the Perplexed, Vol. III, Chapter 52).

To avoid others seeing him (Berachot, loc. cit.).

The previous halachot deal with a person’s private behavior; those which follow deal with the image a wise man should project in public.

This surely does not reflect the balanced temperament appropriate to the wise man described in the first three chapters

Yoma 86a states: “And you shall love God, your Lord.” [This implies that] one should make God beloved by his deeds... he should speak gently to people so that people will say of him, “Happy is his father for teaching him Torah.”
See also Ecclesiastes 9:17 and note our comments to Chapter 2, Halachah 5.

Physical distance is not necessarily what the Rambam is referring to, though it is not ruled out. Rather, he appears to be criticizing a condescending, standoffish posture.

And thus, generate negative feelings

Avot 4:20 suggests this course of action. Berachot 17a mentions that among the unique qualities displayed by Rabbi Yochanan ben Zakkai was that he always greeted others first, extending this courtesy even to “a gentile in the marketplace.”

These statements are a quote from Avot 1:6. In his Commentary to the Mishnah, the Rambam interprets this passage as applying to the actions of one whose character is unknown. We are obligated to give him the benefit of the doubt and consider his deeds in a favorable light. However, if the person is known to be righteous, his acts which appear to be wrong should be viewed as good. Conversely, even the good acts of those known to be wicked are to be viewed with suspicion.
Here, the Rambam makes the statement without any qualification, teaching us to view all men favorably. If a person has done wicked things, his actions must be condemned. However, the person himself should be seen in a positive light.

Talking positively about one’s colleagues has many advantages. Generally, doing so spreads love and good feeling (However, note Chapter 7, Halachah 4) and motivates one’s colleague to reciprocate. Moreover, it is also effective in encouraging positive feelings that have not taken firm hold in a person’s heart. Saying good things about a colleague will ultimately motivate one to feel positively about him as well.

Avot 1:12 states: “Be of the disciples of Aharon: Love peace and pursue it.” Commenting on that mishnah, the Rambam quotes Avot D’Rabbi Natan 12:3 which describes how Aharon would influence the wicked to repent. Aharon would greet a wicked man and befriend him. When that person would be tempted to sin, he would reconsider, thinking “Would it be proper for Aharon’s friend to commit such an act?” Note also the continuation of the passage from Avot D’Rabbi Natan quoted below.
The general tone of the previous points made in this halachah can be summarized by reference to another mishnah in Avot (2:1): “Which is the appropriate path for a person to choose? That which is honorable to himself and brings him honor from men.” The Sage should spread love and peace among others and through his example, motivate them to proper behavior.

As Ecclesiastes 3:7 states, there is “a time to keep silent,” i.e., a time when no person, no matter how wise or tactful, will be able to say the right thing. In this vein, Yevamot 65b states: “Just as it is a mitzvah to say [words] which will be accepted, it is a mitzvah to refrain from saying [words] which will not be accepted.”[In its original context, this source deals with the obligation to admonish a colleague for wrongdoing. In Chapter 6, when the Rambam deals with the laws of rebuke, he does not mention this point, while here, he quotes the statement out of context.]

The three examples are quoted from Avot 4:23. Commenting on that mishnah, the Rambam states: “This is simple; it is ethical advice that enables one to improve one’s friendly relations with others.”

Approaching a colleague when he is upset and not in control of his feelings is not wise. It is preferable to wait until the intensity of those feelings subsides before trying to communicate.

This clause is also mentioned in Avot (ibid.) Looking at a person in this state is usually a spontaneous, natural reaction. The mishnah teaches that we must rise above these feelings

Yevamot (loc. cit.) points to God’s instructions to the prophet, Samuel, regarding the anointing of King David (I Samuel 16:2). When Samuel told God that he was afraid to go anoint David lest Saul’s wrath be aroused, God told him to disguise the intent of his visit by offering a public sacrifice as a pretext for his journey. Similarly, it quotes Genesis 18:13 where God distorted statements made by Sarah which might have made Abraham feel uncomfortable. Avot D’Rabbi Natan (loc. cit.) elaborates on this concept, describing the manner in which Aharon, the High Priest, would resolve a quarrel. He would approach one of the parties and tell him, “You don’t know how sorry your friend is about the rift.” When he had placated him, he would go to the other and tell him the same. When the two met again, they would embrace each other as if they had never disagreed.

Based on Bava Metzia 23b — 24a, in Hilchot Gezelah V’Aveidah (14:13), the Rambam states:
An experienced scholar... does not distort facts at all except in the interests of peace, or with reference to the tractate he is studying, the bed upon which he sleeps, or the place where he is lodging

Note Chapter 2, Halachah 4, where the Rambam speaks of talking only about “matters of knowledge or things that are necessary for his physical welfare.” Here, he also mentions “acts of kindness” since this halachah deals with our relations with others.

Berachot 43b gives this advice together with many other directives (a number of which are quoted in Halachah 9) aimed at preventing the suspicion of improper sexual conduct.

In case a casual observer is not familiar with the Sage’s family and might develop a mistaken impression. It must be noted that the Rambam warns against conversation with women only in the marketplace. He does not quote Avot 1:5: “Do not indulge in excessive conversation with a woman.” Therefore, this point must be understood as a continuation of the theme of this halachah which outlines the proper manner of relating to others. We must conduct ourselves in a manner that does not create even the slightest suspicion of immorality.

The Avodat HaMelech cites Kiddushin 31a, “It is forbidden for a person to walk four cubits with his body held erect as [implied by Isaiah 6:3]: ‘the whole earth is full of his glory.’” An erect stance is interpreted as an act of pride which is an affront, as it were, to G‑d’s omnipresence.
The Kessef Mishneh cites Berachot 43b which quotes the verse cited in Kiddushin, but mentions this prohibition among others (See Halachah 9) directed at preventing sexual enticement or suspicion of it. The verse the Rambam quotes appears to combine the two ideas. However, in the Guide for the Perplexed (Vol. III, Chapter 52), he quotes the passage from Kiddushin within a section dealing with modesty. [These two interpretations are not mutually exclusive. A proud person is often indulgent and both pride and desire are traits inappropriate for a wise man.]

See Yoma 9b for a detailed criticism of the coquetry of the “daughters of Zion” mentioned in the verse cited from Isaiah.

The opposite extreme to walking “toe-to-heel.”

The opposite extreme to standing erect.

Hilchot Tefillah 5:4 quotes Yevamot 105b: “He should cast his eyes downwards as if he is looking at the ground, and his heart upwards as if he is standing in Heaven.”

Our translation follows the printed text of the Mishneh Torah. Many manuscripts state בשוה, rather than בשוק. The former word would be best rendered as “with measured steps.” This gait is a mean between the “toe-to-heel, stately gait” of the haughty and the “madman’s” running in public.

Without any intent of attracting attention or wasting time.

I.e., through the way he carries himself.

Although there is Talmudic support for this statement, there is no quote which states explicitly that a Torah Sage should be dressed attractively. Nevertheless, such behavior is clearly in keeping with the middle path the Rambam has prescribed for the wise.

Shabbat 114a states that a Sage is deserving of death for having such a stain on his clothes. In his Commentary to the Mishnah, Mikveot 9:6, the Rambam also addresses himself to this issue.
The Torah Sages are required to be distinguished... and take pains to have clean clothes. There are many directives on this matter in the Talmud... Because of this obligation, a wise man is concerned about dirty clothes even when the stain does not penetrate to the other side of the material.
When a common person sees an individual whom he associates with Torah knowledge dressed sloppily, he loses respect, not only for the individual, but for the Torah which he represents (Rashi, Shabbat, loc. cit.).

Garments of this hue were only purchased by royalty or people of great wealth

And, by extension, the Torah which is associated with them.

Here, we see an expression of the “middle path” with regard to clothes. Note Shabbat 113a which relates that Rabbi Yochanan would refer to his clothes as “they that honor me,” for a person’s dress should be such that it motivates others to regard him with respect.

Bava Batra 57b relates that Rabbi Yochanan asked Rabbi Bana’ah: “What should the robe of the wise man be like?” The latter replied: “Any garment that does not allow one’s flesh to be visible.” This passage may be the Rambam’s source for his statements about sheer garments. Though the Rashbam interprets this passage as referring to the length of one’s clothes, the Rambam may have interpreted it as referring to their density. It is also possible that the Rambam’s prescription is not based on any specific Talmudic passage, but rather on his general conception of the modesty and dignity with which a Torah Sage should conduct himself.

As obvious from Gittin 56a, the wealthy and prestigious would wear garments that would drag on the ground behind them.

Note Hilchot Klei HaMikdash (8:17) which states that a priest’s garments were of this length. The comparison of the clothes of a sage to those of a priest is also emphasized by Zevachim 19a which relates that a Persian king once arranged the disordered garments of a Sage, telling him that his appearance had to be fitting for a member of “a kingdom of priests and a holy nation” (Exodus 19:6).

An observer would be able to determine that the sage was dressed in this manner out of respect for the Sabbath and not because of pride.

Hilchot Shabbat 30:3 states: Among [the marks of] deference to the Sabbath is to wear clean garments. One’s weekday outfit should be different from that of the Sabbath. If one does not have a change of clothes, one should let his cloak hang down to differentiate between his dress [on the Sabbath] and during the week

For the mud will cover up the patches (Rashi, Berachot 43b).

I.e., doing so is not desirable, but is allowed in a case of poverty.

Berachot (ibid.) states “to remove sweat,” i.e., as a deodorant.

In this instance, everyone will assume that he is following his regular pattern (Berachot, ibid.).

The commentaries question whether the Rambam refers to the entire halachah or merely the last four restrictions which Berachot (ibid.) relates specifically to this purpose.

Berachot (ibid.) mentions homosexuality as well as licentious heterosexual relations.

At this point, the Rambam turns from actions that involve the wise man’s physical well-being and social relationships to the management of his finances and business ethics.

The commentaries have not noted a direct Talmudic source for the opening statements of this halachah. The Rambam appears to be borrowing the phraseology of Psalms 112:5: “It is good for a person to be generous and lend; he manages his finances judiciously.” Indeed, Chullin 84b uses this verse as a prooftext for the advice given in the latter clause of this halachah.
The use of judgment is also fundamentally connected with the behavior of the wise man. Genesis 18:19 which mentions “the path of God” — interpreted by the Rambam as the ideal mean (Chapter 1, Halachah 7) — states: “for I have known him so that he will command his descendants... to keep God’s way and act with righteousness and judgment.” Similarly, in Chapter 1, Halachah 4, the Rambam speaks of a person continually evaluating and judging his behavior.

I.e., a person should not adopt a standard of living which requires him to spend most of his time financing it. An inflated standard of living reduces both the time and energy which can be devoted to spiritual development and often generates unnecessary pressure and tension.

Chullin 84a.

As the Baal Shem Tov would say (Kesser Shem Tov, sec. 121): “Constant pleasure is not pleasure.” A certain measure of restraint is required in order for appetite to develop.

This verse begins: “When God will expand your borders,” which Rashi understands to imply a state of affluence.

Chullin (ibid.) mentions that a person whose health requires that he eat meat more frequently should do so even if he must borrow money for that purpose. Rashi explains that should he fail to do so, his health will be likely to deteriorate and he will become more dependent on the generosity of others.

I.e., on Friday night, in honor of the Sabbath. See Hilchot Shabbat 30:7-10 which state that eating meat and drinking wine are associated with the obligation of עונג שבת — delighting in the Sabbath.

If this degree of indulgence does not strain one’s income and force one to struggle to make ends meet, it is permitted.

Chullin 84b.

So that others will treat him with dignity

The Talmud concludes: “for they are dependent on you, while you are dependent on the One who spoke and created the world.” Note also Yevamot 62b which states that a person is granted his entire livelihood for the sake of his wife.

Here, the Rambam does not use the terms “wise man” or “Torah sage” employed earlier in the chapter. Perhaps, this advice is intended for a broader base of people, including those who would never presume to consider themselves “wise” or “Torah sages.”

Ultimately, a person will seek all three of these goals. The mark of a thoughtful approach to life is the arrangement of one’s priorities in the proper order.

This statement has aroused much controversy among the commentaries. They note that the Rambam — in contrast to Sotah 44a, the apparent source for his comments — changes the sequence of the verses in the Torah which follow the order: house, vineyard, marriage.
A possible solution is proposed by the Ma’aseh Rokeach who notes that the verse mentions “redeeming” a vineyard, i.e., benefiting from its fruit in the fourth year of its growth. Thus, the order employed by the Rambam is not necessarily contradictory to the emphasis of the verse. The Rambam stresses the initial activities of planting a vineyard and purchasing a house. The Torah puts the emphasis on the ultimate goal, dedicating the house and redeeming the vineyard. The vineyard may have been planted before the house was purchased even though it was “redeemed” afterwards. However the textual difficulty is resolved, clearly, the intent of the halachah is that one should arrange a source of income and a place of residence before accepting the financial yoke that accompanies marrying and raising a family.

The contrast is not mentioned in the Talmudic passage cited above.

Note the commentary to the following halachah for the Rambam’s perspective on living on charity.

The only source cited for the following interpretation is Lekach Tov, a relatively late collection of Midrashim.

I.e., in addition to the curses explicitly stated in the Torah, the Rambam infers a curse which is not expressly stated in the verses, i.e., you will act foolishly and conduct your life in a topsy-turvy fashion that will bring about your failure.

In many Torah communities, people are encouraged to follow this “thoughtless” approach to life. Young men study in Yeshivah, marry — and often, proceed to study in Collel — before ever considering how they will earn a livelihood. The Torah leaders who encourage this lifestyle see our age as one in which an abundance of material blessings have been granted, but also as one in which the level of commitment to Torah and Jewish life cannot be compared to that of previous generations. Therefore, they advise making temporary sacrifices in the material realm in order to attain greater spiritual development.

The Targum translates משכיל, rendered here as “thoughtful,” as “successful.” Though that translation is more appropriate within the context of the Biblical passage, the Rambam’s understanding of the word is closer to its literal meaning. The Rambam intends to associate the two. “Success” is a by-product of “thoughtfulness.”

I.e., his success was not limited to the context of human achievement, but was granted Divine blessing.

His possessions and thus, give anyone the opportunity of acquiring them (see Hilchot Nedarim 2:14-19).

As gifts to the Temple treasury.

The Birchai Yosef notes that in Hilchot Arachin V’Charemin 8:13, the Rambam limits the amount a person should give to charity to one-fifth of his possessions and questions why the Rambam does not mention that figure here. The Birchai Yosef explains the difficulty by stating that there are times when a wealthy man should give more than one fifth of his possessions to charity, e.g., when he is presented by a situation of immediate and extreme need. However, even under such circumstances, the wealthy man should follow the advice of this halachah and not give to the extent that he becomes impoverished himself.

In Hilchot Arachin V’Charemin (loc. cit.), the Rambam states:
A person should not consecrate or dedicate all his possessions. A person who does so violates
the spirit of the Torah... This is not piety, but foolishness, for behold, he gives up all his money
and will require [assistance] from others. No mercy should be shown to him.
In reference to similar situations, our Sages declared: Those who show foolish “piety” are
among those who bring chaos to the world. Rather, whoever gives away his money, should
distribute only a fifth and he should follow our prophets’ [guidelines] (Psalms 112:5): “He
manages his finances judiciously.” This applies both with regard to matters of Torah and worldly affairs

In Hilchot Matanot Aniyim 10:18, the Rambam states:
A person should always constrain himself and suffer difficulties, but not seek the assistance of
others, nor become a burden to society. Thus, our Sages stated: Make your Sabbaths like
weekdays, but do not seek out public [assistance]. Even a dignified Sage who became poor
should take up a profession, even a degrading profession and not become dependent on others.
It is better to skin the hides of dead animals than to tell the people, “I am a wise man... Sustain
me.”...[Our] greatest Sages were wood choppers, porters, drawers of water... and did not ask
[for assistance] from the public and refused to accept [it] when offered to them

I.e., a fixed asset which also generates income.

Which though a fixed asset, does not generate income.

A fixed asset.

Which can be destroyed.

Rather, that money should be invested in another asset of lasting value.

Ketubot 79a gives similar advice to a husband who manages his wife’s property and desires to safeguard it (see Hilchot Ishut 22:33). Since it is sound business thinking, the Rambam quotes it for everyone.

Our translation follows the published text which appears somewhat redundant. Many manuscripts substitute להתנאות — “to make himself attractive” — for ליהנות — “to derive pleasure” — in the first clause. According to either reading, the Rambam’s intent is that a person should not sacrifice something of real value for temporary satisfaction.

Yoma 86a lists this as one of the ways a person “can make the name of God beloved.” Shabbat 119b explains that the dearth of people who conducted their business dealings honestly was one of the reasons for Jerusalem’s destruction.

I.e., he does not try to deceive others or create false impressions. See Chapter 2, Halachah 6.

I.e., of his debts and the debts owed him. Alternatively, בחשבון could mean “when drawing up a bill.” When describing the redemption of a Jew sold to gentiles, Leviticus 25:50 states: “Make an account with his master.” Bava Kama 113b asks: “May we deceive him?” and replies, “The Torah states: ‘Make an account;’ i.e., be meticulous in the account.” See also Hilchot Geneivah 7:8, the Rambam’s Commentary to the Mishnah, Keilim 12:7.

Megillah 28a quotes Nechuniah ben HaKanah as relating that one of the virtues for which he was granted long life was his generosity and willingness to forgo debts owed to him.

Yoma 86a quotes Rav as saying, “What is an example of Chillul HaShem (the desecration of God’s name)? Were I to purchase meat and not pay the butcher immediately.”
In Hilchot Yesodei HaTorah 5:11, the Rambam also refers to this statement, but qualifies it, adding, “This is when he has [the means to pay].” The commentaries debate whether here the Rambam is restating the statements in Hilchot Yesodei HaTorah or making a different point; i.e., though buying on credit when one cannot pay immediately is not considered as Chillul HaShem, it is not befitting for a Torah Sage.

Proverbs 11:15 states: “One who acts as a guarantor for a stranger shall surely suffer harm, one who hates suretyship is safe.

Our translation is based on the passage from Yevamot quoted above. Alternatively, a kablan could be interpreted as a guarantor who makes a more encompassing commitment. See Hilchot Malveh V’Loveh 25:5.

An activity to which Sh’vuot 31a applies the words of censure found in Ezekiel 18:18: “And he did not act properly among his people to such an individual.” See also Hilchot Shiluchin 5:5.

According to Torah law, a transaction is not completed until it is confirmed by a kinyan, a formal legal act. Thus, even though two individuals have verbally agreed to a transaction, that agreement does not constitute a binding obligation. Nevertheless, a man of good faith will stand by his verbal commitments and a person who fails to do so, does not find favor in the eyes of our Sages.

Psalms 112:5 (quoted above) states: “It is good for a person to be generous and lend.”

Sanhedrin 81a interprets “He who has not defiled his neighbor’s wife” (Ezekiel 18:6) as referring to a person who did not encroach on a colleague’s source of income. Certain aspects of this behavior are forbidden by Torah law as the Rambam mentions in Hilchot Shechenim 6:8-10. Perhaps, the Rambam implies that a person of exemplary character should go beyond the measure of the law in this area.

Some of the commentaries see this as a reference to the prohibition of אונאת דברים, “wronging a colleague with speech.” See Hilchot Mechirah 14:13.

See Chapter 2, Halachah 3. Hilchot Yesodei Torah 5:11 also concludes with this passage from Yoma 23a.

The Rambam’s statements have the tone of a summation. This halachah concludes his discussion of the mitzvah of developing our characters in an attempt to follow “the path of God.” Chapter 6 begins the discussion of different subjects that touch on our relations with others.