Is learning in Kollel a new idea and a product of relative wealth, or does it come from a venerable tradition?  When I say Kollel, I do not mean the concept of living in deprivation in order to study Torah, as that is a given.  If a person wants to become a scholar in any field, especially those having to do with more spiritual endeavors, hardship is practically a requirement.  Instead, a mean the social convention of kollel, where it is assumed that the parents support a young couple for the first few years of marriage.  This standard often has little to do with the expertise in Torah of the groom, nor is it really designed to create rabbis or community leaders.  It is based on the belief that starting marriage with focus on Torah instead of material pursuits will lay a good foundation for the future.  It can be understood similar to the Manna in the wilderness.  The Jews would eventually have to support themselves in Israel by farming and other pursuits, but during the 40 years in the wilderness they were given an opportunity for a more spiritual existence.

While this sounds admirable, I always assumed that it was the product of a relatively affluent Jewish lifestyle.  I imagined in the alter heim, even many bachurim could not afford to learn, let alone newlyweds.  However, based on today’s Daf there is an interesting Pri Tzaddik who pretty much describes the modern Kollel scenario.  The Pri Tzaddik was written by the famous Rav Tzadok HaCohen MiLublin (1823-1900). 

The Gemara top of amud aleph notes that a Cohen’s consumption of Terumah is equivalent to the sacrificial service in the Temple.  While the Gemara means it in a more legalistic sense, the Pri Tzaddik Beshalach 2:1 sees this as having a deeper meaning.  He suggests that food consumed with the proper intentions, really any food not just Terumah, serves the purpose of Temple Service.  His understanding of Temple service is that it brings blessings by bringing awareness of G-d to the world.  Thus, the Cohen, when he consumes Terumah in the greater land of Israel, also brings awareness of G-d.  And, then quoting this Gemara, he states the following:

As it states in Pesachim, they considered eating Terumah in the country as work of the Temple.  This is the same as the Manna in the wilderness, which allowed the Torah to be internalized through eating.  This same principle explains the custom of lovers of Torah who support their sons after the wedding for many years so that they will have Torah in their hearts even when they must be engage in business later in their lives.  

It is hard to understand Rav Tzaddok’s connection to Terumah except that he seems to generalize the concept that all forms of financial support, like Terumah, when used for miztvos become a form of Temple service and have a similar merit.