I saw this Maharal in Sotah 21a. I don't have the hebrew so I will just put my translation/explanation . I'm wondering what he means in the last line...
-Maharal Sota 21a-
Shavna asked Hillel to "naarov v'niflog". And do not ask, "is it in the hands of man to split this" because what he was saying is - do not stop learning, rather, take a parnasah from your brother and don't go to work. And from now, you will learn more. And since this is the cause of his learning, it is appropriate to share with him since the Torah was caused by both of them.
Note that the philosophers are mistaken in their belief that what matters is attaining a level of "sichlis" (JS: which presumably the one working will not attain as a result of supporting someone who will obtain this level). What really matters is the devekus of a person to his creator through Torah. As such, one who causes Torah is like the Torah itself.
Hillel did not want anyone else causing his Torah (JS: why not?)
Best regards,
Yeshayahu
The Ben Yehoyada writes that the reason why Hillel did not want anyone else facilitating his Torah learning was because of the end of the verse from Shir ha'Shirim 8:7 that the Gemara cites here. They will despise somebody who wishes to receive money in exchange for the Torah.
Kol Tuv,
Dovid Bloom
Hi Rabbi Bloom!
Thanks so much for your response. I would love to see the Ben Yehoyadah inside but I could not find it. Additionally, it would seem according to the Maharal that boz yavuzu lo would mean selling schar earned by learning Torah in the past. No additional Torah is learned so neither person really benefits from that transaction. However, it would seem, we do not say boz yavuzu for additional Torah learned in the future as a result of such a deal. In fact, it is beneficial to both parties. I could understand fully if the Maharal means to say it is a zero sum game where there is only a certain amount of schar for limud HaTorah and it can all go to one person or it can be split - which is how I have typically assumed this works. However, the Maharal is so interesting to me specifically because he seems to say that the schar is not capped at a certain amount and both get as much schar as warrants....AND in fact they get equal schar.
This seems to conflict with the Gemara in Berachos that says ayin lo raaasah Elokim...that limud HaTorah actually gets more schar than supporting Torah.
Happy to hear any thoughts you may have.
Thanks,
Yeshayahu