From the context, we don’t know who precisely are the “they” mentioned in the last line, but it appears likely that the text wants to tell us that the “elders” and the two rabbis mentioned by name all come to an agreement: Studying is more important than doing. But the ending of the story has a bit of a paradoxical twist: Yes, studying is greater, but only because it leads to doing – which, of course, suggests that what really matters is the application of what one learns! We might reasonably suggest with tongue only slightly in cheek that this is the first recorded discussion in Jewish history of the concept of “applied Jewish wisdom,” the theme of this issue of the Journal of Jewish Education. The debate between learning and doing is an old and ongoing one in Jewish intellectual life. The oft-cited mishnaic text (Peah 1:1) discussing four activities through which one enjoys the “profits” (literally “fruits”) in this world, but gains the “principal” on that “investment” in the world-to-come (namely, honoring one’s father and mother; performing righteous deeds; making peace between a person and his or her friend; and studying Torah) ends, famously, by stating that talmud Torah k’neged kulam – the study of Torah is equal to them all. And here there is no justification that Torah study is important because it leads to its being “applied.” As one scholar has put it, “The Talmud is a book put together by people who saw intellectual activity as sanctifying.[The] main reason for the Talmud’s preeminence, the chief cause of its central role in Jewish history was not practical at all. The Talmud was Torah” (Goldenberg, 1984, p. 167). The valorization of the purely intellectual – the world of study outweighing the value of doing – was expressed in things such as valuing those aspects of the Talmudic corpus that were the least connected to the life of Jews such as the sections of the Talmud that deal with the proper performance of the Temple sacrifices, something since the destruction of the Temple almost 2,000 years ago is the very opposite of “applied”! And the idealization of the scholar as the “highest embodiment of religious values in the institution of the Yeshiva” (Halbertal & Halbertal, 1998, p. 465) led some leaders in the Jewish community to worry about the moral failings of this kind of education. It was this concern that led to the growth of the Mussar movement in the 19th century (Halbertal & Halbertal, 1998), which, in the light of our focus in this issue of the Journal, might be seen as an attempt to change traditional Jewish education’s überintellectual focus back toward a more applied kind of orientation. JOURNAL OF JEWISH EDUCATION 2019, VOL. 85, NO. 4, 345–347 https://doi.org/10.1080/15244113.2019.1689728

中文翻译：

---

编者注

从上下文来看，我们不知道最后一行中提到的“他们”究竟是谁，但文本似乎是想告诉我们，“长老”和名字中提到的两个拉比都达成了一致: 学习比做更重要。但故事的结局有一点自相矛盾：是的，学习更伟大，但这只是因为它导致做——当然，这表明真正重要的是一个人学到的东西的应用！我们可以合理地暗示，这是犹太历史上第一次有记录的关于“应用犹太智慧”概念的讨论，这是本期《犹太教育杂志》的主题。学与做之间的争论是犹太知识分子生活中一个古老而持续的争论。经常被引用的混杂文字（Peah 1：1）讨论四种活动，通过这些活动，一个人在这个世界上享受了“利润”（字面意思是“水果”），但在来世获得了“投资”的“本金”（即孝敬父母；行善；在一个人与他或她的朋友之间建立和平；以及学习妥拉）结束，著名的是，塔木德妥拉 k'neged kulam – 对妥拉的研究与所有人平等。在这里，没有理由认为托拉研究很重要，因为它导致它被“应用”。正如一位学者所说，“《塔木德》是一本书，由将智力活动视为神圣的人编撰而成。《塔木德》卓越的主要原因，其在犹太历史中发挥核心作用的主要原因根本不切实际。塔木德就是托拉”（Goldenberg, 1984, p. 167）。纯粹知识分子的价值——学习的世界超过做的价值——表现在诸如重视塔木德语料库中与犹太人生活最不相关的那些方面，例如塔木德处理的部分圣殿祭祀的正确表现，自大约 2000 年前圣殿被毁以来的东西与“应用”截然相反！将学者理想化为“叶史瓦机构中宗教价值观的最高体现”（Halbertal & Halbertal，1998 年，第 465 页）导致犹太社区的一些领导人担心这种教育的道德缺陷. 正是这种担忧导致了 19 世纪穆萨尔运动的发展（Halbertal & Halbertal，1998），其中，鉴于我们在本期期刊中的关注点，这可能被视为试图将传统的犹太教育的超智力关注点转变回更实用的方向。2019 年犹太教育杂志，第一卷。85，没有。4、345–347 https://doi.org/10.1080/15244113.2019.1689728